School Building Committee Meeting- 12/16/10

I attended the SBC meeting last Thursday night and as usual there was little public attendance- 2 town residents (including myself).  I attend these meetings because of my interest in knowing first hand how this committee is going to spend my taxpayer dollars. 

In my past SBC meeting notes, I have noted discussions about the likely project bids being much lower than the estimated $78 million… perhaps as low as $60-65 million given the recent bids for other area high school projects. The new Wilbraham-Hampden Regional HS project is expected to cost $65M (see latest projections as of 12/10/10) vs. original $82.2M with forecasted savings to district taxpayers of $3.8M.  With a significantly lower MSBA reimbursement rate Longmeadow could potentially see much greater savings.

Last June Longmeadow voters gave the SBC authority to spend up to $78 million.  Comments by some SBC members at the October 20 meeting (see notes) and at Thursday's meeting have suggested that because there will be a pot of “unspent” project dollars, the committee should consider adding additional project elements that were not part of the original scope.  Discussion at this meeting also hinted at a possible “spending strategy” to install synthetic turf on the stadium field.  Read the meeting notes below for details.

The agenda for this meeting was of particular interest since there was going to be a discussion + a vote on various project “add alternates” + a number of project scope decisions.  Below are my “meeting notes”…

Scope changes were reviewed and voted.

1. PVC (vs. TPO) was chosen as the preferred roofing material.  There were no cost implications nor performance differences.  A greater US + local installation and life experience with the PVC material gave it the advantage.
2. Waterless urinals (vs. low flow urinals) were chosen.  There is no cost differential but there are maintenance advantages for the waterless urinals.  There is no odor issue with waterless urinals and Roland Joyal indicated that they have worked well at Chicopee High School. 
3. Hand “high velocity forced air” driers were chosen over paper towels for most of the bathrooms. There is a $50-60K increase in cost for hand driers but there are reduced maintenance and paper towel cost savings to compensate for the increased cost. 

Bid “add alternates” (AA) were discussed. 
“Add alternates” are possible project additions to the original scope that are included with the project bid specification package.  A Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) is developed from this information but this price does not include these AAs.  If the project has unspent money because the GMP is less than the $78 million, some or all of these AAs can be implemented by the SBC.

Tom Murphy of Joslin Lesser & Associates explained there are two types of add alternates… “trade” and “non-trade”.  In accordance with MGL Chapter 149, the “trade” AAs need to be prioritized and implemented in order.  If a decision is made that the SBC does not want to implement AA #1 then they cannot implement AA #2.  The other type AAs, “non-trade” do not require prioritization and any of them can be implemented by the SBC using unspent project monies.

Here are the add alternates that were discussed.

Trade- Add Alternates

#1: replacement of the natatorium ceramic tile floor + relocation of the diving board, cost = $200K

This 1971 wing renovation item was not included with the original project scope.  The pool area floor has some missing tiles and the current location of diving board presents some safety (?) related issues.

This is an item that does not need to be done at the time of the project and could be deferred and implemented through the town’s capital spending plan. SBC member Roland Joyal voiced his strong support for this item.  Because we are building a “new” showcase school, we need to upgrade this part of the facility as well.

#2: Addition of hydraulic lift for the auditorium orchestra pit, cost = $400K
The current project plans include a manual lift system that takes time and resources to move the platform.  Probable use is about 12 times/ year. This item cannot be incorporated at a later date and needs to included in the project bid specification package.   In addition, OMR needs to complete a design for the bid package.

Superintendent Marie Doyle and LHS principal Larry Berte both favored this item (as did Michael Mucci- LHS music dept chairman) and rated it as a higher priority than item #1.

The SBC decided to defer prioritization of the trade AAs until the next SBC meeting on January 5.

Non- Trade Add Alternates

#3: Under terrace outdoor storage, cost = $150K
This item is an additional outdoor enclosed area for storage of equipment and utilizes space under the arts terrace on back east side of the building.  This addition would include a concrete slab on grade and would be useful for storage of equipment including athletic field items that are currently stored under the stadium bleachers.

There were positive comments by Mike Wrabel and other members of the SBC for inclusion of this item.

#4: Additional site landscaping features, cost ~ $100K
This item is a combination of aesthetic landscaping + function including an outdoor classroom(s), benches, etc.  At this point the details are not fully developed and the quote is only a best guess estimate.  There was some discussion that this would be a great project element for public donations.

#5: Synthetic Turf Practice Fields, cost ~ $600K+
There is no provision in the original project scope for installation of synthetic turf practice fields.  The current athletic practice fields will be damaged or eliminated during construction so existing project plans included installation of two new natural grass fields (see drawing).  This synthetic turf proposal was originally limited to the full size field on Grassy Gutter Road/Bliss Road.  However, just this past week a second synthetic turf practice field (located near the gymnasium) was proposed as a possible add alternate.  The $600K quote does not include lights or the second field installation.  $25K for a detailed design package is required in order to include this add alternate in the bid package.  This money would need to be spent even if the SBC decided not to go forward with this AA.

Co-chair Barkett commented that it was Alex Rotsko, LHS Athletic Director who asked for the second synthetic turf practice field.  However, because neither of the new practice fields was lighted, he was not completely satisfied with the plan.  Mr. Barkett stated that Mr. Rotsko would rather see the SBC support installation of synthetic turf for the stadium field.

At this point a number of SBC members voiced their opposition to expend significant money for new project elements that were outside of the original scope.  Both Ms. Jester and co-chair Swanson voiced concerns about supporting this synthetic turf AA and thought that the SBC should solicit feedback from the community.  In addition, Ms. Jester felt that there was insufficient information available about the subject.  Co-chair Barkett felt that the synthetic turf practice field(s) were not outside the scope and that town residents need not be consulted.

Mr. Joyal who had originally proposed synthetic turf for the stadium field during the October 20 SBC meeting (see meeting notes) felt that the SBC already had the authority to do so.  He also stated that most new high school projects included synthetic turf fields (representatives at the meeting from Gilbane stated that this was not true). Mr. Joyal also stated that “sports is the front porch of your school” meaning that if our new high school is built without a synthetic turf stadium field, our school would be looked at as an inferior facility.

An interesting comment was made by Jeanne Roberts of OMR who reminded the group that funding for many of the new public high schools with synthetic turf cited by Mr. Joyal were funded at a much higher MSBA reimbursement rate than what Longmeadow will be receiving.

Co-chair Barkett stated that the cost of synthetic turf for the stadium field would likely be much greater than $600K since the Americans with Disabilities Act would require a significant upgrade to the high school stadium.  He also believed that installation of synthetic turf for the stadium field was not within the project scope.

Town Manager/SBC member Robin Crosbie proposed that the SBC defer a decision on the synthetic turf until next year and use next year’s Annual Town Meeting to introduce a warrant article to use unspent project monies to install synthetic turf on the stadium field.   This warrant article would only require a simple majority YES vote to pass.

The SBC voted to not include synthetic turf in the project add alternates list but there was a recommendation to form a subcommittee to develop more information on the proposal for later consideration.

Last June Longmeadow voters gave the SBC the authority to build a new high school for $78M (in MSBA terminology, it was a building renovation + new addition, not a new high school).  If the construction climate allows Longmeadow to build this facility for less money, the SBC should try to maximize those savings.  Changes to the project scope to include a hydraulic lift for the auditorium and/ or synthetic turf practice fields are beyond what the average taxpayer voted for last June.

If the town can save $5-10 million on the high school building project, this savings will reduce the taxpayer burden for many years to come.

I would like to see the SBC become more focused upon bringing this project in at the lowest possible price tag- not simply at less than the $78 M. Upgrading the swimming pool area and adding synthetic turf fields should be prioritized with the rest of our town's capital needs. We have many higher priority capital needs in our town.

Don’t forget that our teachers contract comes up for collective bargaining in the next budget cycle for FY2012.

If you are concerned with what you have just read, send an email to:

Robert Barkett-SBC co-chair, rbarkett@longmeadow.org 

Christine Swanson-SBC co-chair, cswanson@longmeadow.org

Electronic Pickpocket

As technology adds new features to our everyday lives... opportunities for electronic thieves will continue to emerge.   With embedded RFID chip technology being used everywhere, there is a potential for electronic theft of credit card information without your knowledge.

Below is a TV news video clip from station WREG in Memphis, TN highlighting a new way that your credit card information can be stolen.



Click here for additional information on the WREG website regarding this new high technology threat.

Paperless SB meetings... a good idea but

but there are still a couple of technical issues remaining ...

At their last meeting on November 15 chairman Rob Aseltine declared that the Longmeadow Select Board was going to conduct their meetings using new netbook computers which would reduce the large volume of paper that is generated every week.  In addition, he stated that town residents will be able to access SB meeting information via the Internet. 

An announcement was made that a "new website" had been created by the Select Board to share these documents with town residents.  Here is a link to this new resource.  I've checked this link for the past 3 weeks after the initial announcement was made but no documents as yet have been available to the public. 

I usually watch the bi-weekly SB meetings but being without a copy of the relevant information that is being discussed sometimes makes it very difficult.  I expect that having the pertinent information available will be particularly useful for upcoming budget discussions. I applaud this effort to share information in a timely manner with the public.

However, there still appears to be "some minor glitches" remaining.  Perhaps after the IT consolidation is completed and additional school dept. resources can be utilized, these problems will be worked out faster.

Going paperless and sharing SB meeting materials with town residents via the Internet is a great idea!

I would hope that meeting materials for tomorrow night's SB meeting will be made available before the meeting commences.

IT Consolidation- Final Comments

At the Select Board meeting on December 6 there will likely be a vote for the consolidation of Longmeadow's town wide IT resources under the auspices of the School Department and School Committee.  There have been a couple of prior posts about this subject (see IT Consolidation- Part I, IT Consolidation- Part II) as well as a SB public hearing on November 15.

At this public hearing there were many comments from town residents both for and against the proposal. Some opposed the IT consolidation because it would require changing the Town Charter while other people objected that the school department should not be burdened with a broadening scope of their primary goals.

Tim Topitizer, a town resident and also a professional in the Information Technologies industry and with some prior involvement with the town's IT needs spoke against the proposed organization change.  Mr. Topitizer asked why there was no strategic plan for the proposed consolidation and that there should be an assessment across all town and school departments looking at present and future needs before a consolidation takes place.  I thought that his comments were right on target!

Below is a short video clip courtesy of LCTV with Mr. Topitizer's comments...




Consolidating the town's IT resources into a single function for a more effective use of our budget monies is a goal that most people agree is a good idea.

However, the town's IT effort has been under resourced for many years.  Town Manager Robin Crosbie has managed to conduct town government business with only one full time IT employee + some occasional support from the School Department.  With this proposed IT consolidation Ms. Crosbie will no longer have IT resources in the town government organization and will have to rely upon the School Superintendent and the new IT department to properly prioritize projects. 

If this IT organization change occurs, I would still expect that the Town Manager to have IT goals and responsibilities even though the required resources will not be direct reports.

Our town has historically been financially limited in most budget areas and this is not likely to change in the foreseeable future. I am not concerned with line item transfers from the new IT dept for other school uses... but I am concerned that the business of our town and its residents may be compromised if the School Department and the School Committee must choose between educating our students (their primary mission) and all of the other IT needs for the town.

Rob Aseltine states that if this IT consolidation is to occur, it cannot be done under Town Government because of a recent Federal ruling by the US Dept of Education which prohibits IT consolidation of school dept resources outside the auspicies of the school dept.  SB member Gold states that East Longmeadow has already completed their IT consolidation under town government.  So it would appear that this issue is not clear.

I would urge the Select Board to defer this vote until a strategic plan and town/school wide assessment of needs is completed.

Food Drive This Weekend

Selectman's Cup Thanksgiving Food Drive

Saturday, Nov. 20th, 10 am to 3 pm

Three Drop off Locations:

-Longmeadow Shops

-East Longmeadow High School

-Heritage Park Pavillion

Donations can also be made on game day.

See video below for additional information.

IT Consolidation- Part II

Read the first post on this subject- IT Consolidation, Part I

I believe that effective use of computer technology and related systems is one of the important keys to our long term success as a town. Many corporations have successfully navigated recent turbulent economic times through innovative use of technology. Productivity gains leading to lower costs can be achieved through effective deployment of new capital (+ employee training) particularly for computer technology related systems.

Various computer technologies and systems are involved in many aspects of our town government ranging from the Finance Department, Town Clerk and Assessor’s offices, Storrs Library, DPW and Police/ Fire Departments.

Technology is vitally important to the success of the education process in Longmeadow as well.

As a town we do some things well and other things not so well.

The installation of the new water meters with transmitters that allow the town to collect and bill town residents in a much faster and more efficient manner is but one small example of how technology can help the town reduce costs and achieve our long term goals.

Our town wide high speed phone system can effectively inform town residents (or a group of town residents) about an emergency or situation in a very short time and is another good example of what we are doing well.

In contrast to those examples, original property records in the Assessor's Office are 20th century technology at best. If you have needed to review the details of your original property record at Town Hall, you will find that the town still uses paper records. Let’s hope that the piece of paper for your original plot plan is never lost or misplaced. Check with East Longmeadow and other surrounding towns and you will find that they utilize an online GIS system which provides a wealth of information for homeowners and other interested parties. I suspect that there may be significant cost reduction and/or service improvement opportunities in this area.

We need more training for all of our town employees including teachers to effectively utilize the technology resources that we already have and for each town employee to become more productive in the workplace.

The list of technology needs in our town are great…

It is more than new computers, wireless networking and new software for our school system. Police, Fire, Town Hall, Storrs Library all have opportunities and needs that could reduce costs and provide new services that must be considered when allocating our limited financial resources.

Without regular (or annual) Proposition 2½ overrides Longmeadow will always be required to prioritize its needs. Technology equipment and resources will become an ever increasing demand on our limited resources.

Armand Wray, School Committee chair cited a “memorandum of understanding” (MOU) between the SC and SB at this week’s SC meeting. It stated that the proposed new IT department’s budget will not be subject to “line item” transfer of funds to other school department needs.

That is not my concern…. The primary mission of the School Superintendent and the Longmeadow SC is the education of our children.   Adding the additional responsibility for the broad scope of the town’s IT needs just doesn’t make sense.

The issue of "student privacy" being used as a reason for consolidating the IT department under the School Department is a "red herring".  The Police and Fire Departments already have rigid security requirements under Homeland Security so the issue is not unique within our town.

From Wikipedia… Information Systems (IS) is an academic/ professional discipline concerned with the strategic, managerial and operational activities involved in the gathering, processing, storing, distributing and use of information, and its associated technologies, in society and organizations.

I recommend that the Longmeadow Select Board consider creation of a new separate department under Town Government called Information Systems and not simply consolidate the current town and school IT efforts under the auspices of the Longmeadow School Department.

There will be a Select Board hearing on Monday, November 15 at 8 PM to hear public comments regarding the consolidation of the school and town IT departments under the School Department. This public hearing is required because a change in the Town Charter is required.

While it would appear that the Aseltine-Barkett-Swanson majority is in favor of this change and this hearing is only a formality, I would urge all concerned residents to attend the meeting and voice their opposition to this town charter change.

Note: If you are interested in adding your comments, simply send them with your name and address to longmeadowbuzz@comcast.net.

Longmeadow Police Investigate Break-ins

My wife and I were taking a walk yesterday afternoon in our neighborhood and learned about a series of robberies that had taken place- something that doesn't happen very often. 


We were concerned when we learned that we knew most of the homeowners and they were elderly.

It was good to see that the robberies were made public this morning with a front page story in the Springfield Republican.  Here is a link to the full story. Alerting all home owners in the affected area as well as the rest of the town is good policy.  Hopefully, a tip from an alert home owner will eventually result in capture of the individual(s) involved with these break-ins.

In the past the town of Longmeadow has been relatively slow in publicizing such events.  Reading the weekly police log in the Longmeadow News or the Daily Log (updated once/ week) on the Longmeadow Police Department website is not an effective way to alert town residents.

We have a high speed automated phone system that can alert all town residents or a specific section of town about a problem or issue within minutes.  It has been used in the past effectively to find missing persons, water main outage, etc. 

Why wasn't it used to alert town residents about these robberies?  

Not everyone gets the Springfield Republican newspaper delivered or watches the local news everyday.  I as a resident in the affected area of town want to be informed.  Perhaps, such a call would have encouraged a town resident to call the police if they spotted a suspicious individual in their neighborhood.

Our Longmeadow Police Department should consider implementing a more rapid reporting of incidents in our town.  Amherst and many other towns in Massachusetts use a system called Crime Reports.  Crime in Amherst is updated by the Police Department on a daily basis.  Below is a sample of how and what is reported...

If you haven't signed up for the automatic town wide phone list, you should plan to do so.... Click here to signup.  In a town wide emergency you will be glad that you did!

IT Consolidation- Part I

The Longmeadow Select Board started its discussion of the consolidation of the Information Technology (IT) organizations of town government and schools at the SB's August 23 goal setting session at the First Church (see my earlier post).  From the outset it appeared that the goal was to re-organize IT services with the School Department assuming complete responsibility for town wide support including people and resources.

A recent survey showed the following town wide IT support areas...

• serving 50 different departments, boards and committees
• housed in 13 different buildings
• with over 700 employees and 3100 students
• deployment of over 2000 computers, laptops, projectors, printers, etc. that are connected to over 150 servers and network devices
• using over 100 different applications

The School Dept IT needs are in many cases very different from town government needs with financial and other business related software being extremely important to the successful town government operations. Current town related IT headcount is 1 while the School Dept has ~ 5.7 employees (only 1 FT- 12 months/year employee).  Storrs Library depends upon the town to provide computer IT support and from my involvement this support has been almost non-existent for many years.
________________________________________

One stumbling block to the proposed IT consolidation...
Our 6½ year old Town Charter (Section 6-2) states that the Dept of Finance and Administration is responsible for the town government IT and led by the Finance Director (currently Paul Pasterczyk).

Section 6-2 Department of Finance and Administration
(a) Establishment and Scope - there shall be a department of finance and administration responsible for the fiscal affairs of the town and for the coordination and overall supervision of all business, fiscal, and financial activities of all town agencies, including the school department. The department of finance and administration shall include the functions of accounting, tax and fee collections, treasury management, assessing, purchasing, contracting, information technology, town clerk’s functions, personnel functions and those functions further assigned by the town manager.
(b) The department shall be subject to the direction of a finance director who shall be appointed by, and directly responsible to, the town manager. The finance director shall serve at the pleasure of the town manager and shall be especially fitted by education, training and experience for the duties of the office. The finance director may also serve simultaneously as town accountant; or collector; or treasurer, but may not serve as town accountant and collector simultaneously.
_________________________________________________

This Charter "stumbling block" apparently has now been resolved by the use of an "administrative code" (as defined in Section 6-1) and outlined in a letter issued by TM Robin Crosbie...
 
"The Longmeadow Select Board will conduct a hearing on Monday November 15 at 8:00 pm on a proposed re-organization under Section 6-1 of the Charter. The proposed administrative code, submitted by the Town Manager to the Select Board, would consolidate town Information Technology (IT) with school IT, and place IT operations and budget under the school department. Staff and officials representing the town and school have been working since late summer and placed a proposal before the Select Board on November 1. The proposal anticipates that a consolidation will be more effective and efficient in coordinating IT purchases and implementation of new technology. The plan also proposes the formation of a Technology Advisory Board to assist personnel and policy makers in developing a strategic plan and advise them on future needs. The School Committee will be discussing this proposal at its November 8 meeting."

Below are video clips (courtesy of LCTV) from the November 1 SB meeting where the latest IT consolidation discussions took place.





Below is a video clip from the School Committee meeting on November 8 during which IT consolidation was discussed.



Given the role of technology in the operation of both schools and town government, I agree that the Town of Longmeadow has not properly funded nor organized its IT effort.  This is particularly true with regard to town government IT services.

In my next post I will propose an alternative organizational proposal for consideration by the SB.

The Longmeadow- EBAY Connection

The Town of Longmeadow has now moved to the Internet as a means to sell surplus equipment and confiscated items that typically in the past has been sold via a public auction at the Police Department garage on a Saturday afternoon.

There is a notice on the http://www.longmeadow.org/ homepage announcing that there is an EBAY AUCTION currently underway by the Town of Longmeadow on EBAY from now until November 16 with a total of 88 items eligible to be purchased. 

The current bids for these items range from $5 for a BMX bike to $4050 for forklift/ bucket loader.  Other items include printers, antique chandeliers, lawn mowers and much more.

Congratulations to Chad Thompson/ Purchasing Coordinator and other town employees who organized this effort.  Hopefully, using EBAY will derive much greater financial results than would have been achieved by a local auction at the LPD garage.

School Building Committee Meeting- 10/20/10

My primary reason for attending the monthly SBC meetings is to provide timely updates for town residents about the new high school project and how our taxpayer money will be spent. I believe that this activity is particularly important since the SBC has done a very poor job of sharing information with town residents. The last set of minutes posted on the SBC website are dated August 19- a meeting that took place over two months ago. Minutes approved last week for the Sept 16 meeting have not as yet been posted. The SBC does not have televised meetings and in addition, the SBC meeting agenda provides no opportunity for public comments. The short five minute project updates by the SBC co-chairs at Select Board meetings are not adequate.

This project has important financial implications for our town and its taxpayers.  The SBC needs to improve its communication.

At last month’s meeting, I reported in my "meeting notes" that there was an emerging theme voiced by a number of SBC members to consider adding new project elements (called “add alternates) to the original project scope now that it appeared likely that the new high school project was going to cost significantly less than the originally estimated $78 million. Since town voters have already approved a Proposition 2½ “debt exclusion” override up to $78M, the SBC could consider inclusion of new project options (e.g., synthetic turf for practice field, hydraulic stage platform for new auditorium, air conditioning) without the need for any additional voter approval.

At this meeting which was attended by 6 town residents (vs. 2 at the September 16 meeting), co-chairs, Barkett and Swanson went on record to state that the SBC should not consider the $78 million as a blank check and that all changes should be considered very carefully and be “fully vetted”. Town Manager Crosbie went further to state that the SBC should “stay within the scope of the project and not stray from the mission”.

It will be interesting to watch whether or not this guidance is followed through the preparation of the bid specification packages + “add alternatives”.

Below are additional “meeting notes” from last week’s SBC meeting….

• The high school project is on schedule with early site preparation work for relocation of major utilities (electric, telecommunications, etc.) starting sometime in November. As mentioned in last month’s meeting notes, a major portion of the high school parking lot on Williams Street (~ 40 parking spaces) will be eliminated. A portion of displaced student parking in the Grassy Gutter Road parking lot will be relocated to the Bliss tennis courts parking. There will be designated “student parking only” for 40 of 51 available spaces.
  
• As part of this plan a new permanent concrete sidewalk will be constructed on the south side of Bliss Road (from Bliss tennis courts to the high school) to provide a safe pathway for students during the construction period. Some concern was expressed about the displacement of parking for tennis court users.
  
• The relocation of the School Department offices to Wolf Swamp Road School is proceeding well with the new office space almost completed. The Superintendent reported that there were no significant dislocations for students/ teachers. Plans are being made to make the move during the holiday break in late December. The School Dept will remain at WS school until the 1971 wing renovation is completed in 2013 prior to the opening of the new high school. This temporary relocation is estimated to cost ~ $50K.
  
• There will be a Longmeadow Planning Board review for the new high school project on November 3 . All property abutters have been invited to share concerns and issues. No problems are anticipated.
  
• Continuing from last month’s meeting there was a lengthy discussion of project “add alternates”. A FAQ that was prepared for the SBC members about the add alternate process was discussed. Co-chair Swanson stated that this document would be posted on the SBC website (not as yet posted).
  
  The “add alternate” list seems to be growing. At the last SBC meeting, there was a discussion of “synthetic turf” for the HS practice field. At this meeting, inclusion of a “hydraulic lift” for a platform on the auditorium stage, upgrades to the swimming pool area (diving board and pool deck replacement), consideration of air conditioning for the entire high school (not just the adminstration offices) vs. the originally specified “air displacement” system and alternative roofing systems were discussed as possible "add alternates".
  
• Jeanne Roberts (OMR- architect) discussed the need to develop a list of salvagable items could be physically removed from the high school prior to its demolition.  This list needs to be detailed with descriptions + photos + locations if the task is to be successfully completed. This list does not include classroom by classroom inventory that will be transported to the new school but rather items like bathroom partitions, fixtures including toilets, and other items that could be used for other town facilities.  Town Manager Robin Crosbie mentioned that there have been a number of recent upgrades at the high school so these items could have significant value.  At this point there are no town/school resources allocated to this task but Ms. Roberts recommended that it be done sooner rather than later.
  
• There will be a SBC meeting on November 10 (time/ location TBD) to discuss the growing list of project “add alternates”. At this meeting there will be a “value engineering” discussion to help identify and prioritize these items. The project bid specification process requires a listing as well as prioritization (for trade related options) for these “add alternates”.
  
• An update of the details of plans for the high school project financing was provided.  The SBC financial sub committee is giving strong consideration toward the use of permanent financing (vs. temporary construction loans, interest payment only) at the beginning of the project.  This option is being considered for implementation in December to lock in low interest rates.  The initial bond would be for $25 million with a 30 year bond maturity. Using permanent financing will create a interest + principal repayment in the current FY2011 of ~ $500K which would increase FY11 property taxes by ~ $.22/1000 or $77 for the average homeowner.  There would not be a need for voter approval since it is part of the $78 million Proposition 2½ debt exclusion.   A final decision on financing options will be made by the Select Board in November.

Stay tuned... the next important SBC meeting is scheduled for November 10.