GORHAM BUILDING COMMITTEE M INUTES

July 6, 2004

 

 

Committee members present:                                                Central Office Staff:

Reed Leberman                                                          Patrick Low

Jean Tremblay                                                                                               

Jeff Hill                                                                                                           

Robert Demers                                                           Public in attendance:

Jeff Stewart                                                                 Dennis Pednault

Jo Carpenter – recording secretary                           Paul Bousquet

                                                                                    Keith Parent

 

Call to Order

 

            Because there was confusion about the time of the meeting Chairman Reed Leberman called the meeting to order until 6:40 PM.

 

Nomination of New Committee Member

 

            Jeff Hill reported that he had spoken to Glen Eastman about serving on the committee and Glen had said that he was not interested at this time.

 

            Dennis Pednault was present and expressed interest in serving on the committee. He told the committee that he is a mechanical engineer. He said that he has worked on many large projects as part of his job at Fraser Paper.

 

            Reed Leberman nominated Dennis Pednault to serve on the Building Committee. This nomination was seconded by Robert Demers and passed unanimously.

 

Goals of the Committee

 

            Superintendent Patrick Low addressed the committee about his ideas on a successful building project. He said that he has been involved in building a new building and a very successful renovation. He said that whatever the outcome of the committees’ work, the members have to back the decision 110%.

 

            He said the committee and the school board will need to know how the project will:

v      Address health and safety concerns

v      Increase student achievement

v      Affect finances – immediately and long-term

v      Build community pride

 

Patrick said that ultimately the building is not the school – students, staff and parents are the school.

 

      Patrick stressed that public input is key to any successful building project.

 

      Reed Leberman said that he feels the process was hurried last time. He said that he knew something needed to be done but didn’t have enough time to make up his mind about what exactly should be done.

 

Reed said that this committee is doing the school board’s leg work.

 

Jean Tremblay said that that is exactly how the school board views the committee.

 

A discussion was held on the merits of building new versus renovating the existing building.

 

Jeff Stewart expressed the opinion that the town does not want to hear about a building project year after year. It would be nice to do sometime new and be done with it. He said that GMHS could be leveled and a new building completed long before a renovation would be finished.

 

Patrick Low said to keep in mind that there are many creative ways to renovate that can reduce costs.

 

Robert Demers said that part of GMHS is its 1924 vintage. He said we have been nickel and diming it for years and people are tired of it. He said there have been many studies and he does not feel it is worth putting in any more money into GHMS. He said that the Ed Fenn is a different story. The renovation proposed two years ago is pretty straight forward and there seemed to be support for it. He suggested that the committee consider putting that renovation forward this year.

 

Jean Tremblay said that the committee’s charge is to look at the buildings K – 12.

 

Reed Leberman said that by using the Building Capital Reserve Fund the Ed Fenn project could be done for very little money.

 

Dennis Pednault said that he feels that the committee needs to look at the fundamental assumptions and the scope of both projects. He said that architects will give you what you ask for.

 

Patrick suggested that the committee may also want to look at different lengths of  mortgages.

 

From this discussion possible goals were suggested:

·         Goal 1 – Evaluate Ed Fenn project and consider putting it forward for March 2005

·         Goal 2 – Address fundamental assumptions, including demographics

·         Goal 3 – Look at areas of duplication – town and school, especially the auditorium

·         Goal 4 – study possible scenarios for auditorium

·         Goal 5 – The committee must be able to come informed about the status of the buildings so they can address taxpayers concerns and questions.

·         Goal 6 – Need to get the Selectmen involved or at least be sure they are informed. Will need to meet with them and make an effort to sell the project

 

Dennis said that the committee will have to weigh needs versus wants. 

 

Patrick commented that it will come down to what will or can the town pay for.

 

Reed commented that he believes the committee should look at the concept of building or renovating “green” – energy efficient buildings, which would cut operating costs and save tax dollars.

 

Keith commented that the roofs on both schools are desperately in need of repair. He said that people think the work done this year fixed the problem but it was just a stopgap measure. He said the roof over the cafeteria is particularly bad. He said if the Ed Fenn project is done first then it could be 5 years before GHMS is addressed and the roof will not last that long.

 

Reed commented that the committee needs to give each reasonable option a good look.

 

Jean said that some committee members are leaning toward building a new middle high school because of the age of the building and they feel it should be built on site.  He stressed the need to keep an open mind and study all options before arriving at a decision.

 

Reed said that he would like to see the committee evaluate renovating on site, building new on site and building new off-site. He said if the committee could come up with a proposal and a budget for each option, then this information could be presented to the public and some type of informal vote could be taken to help the committee narrow its focus.

 

Patrick said that if the people decided that they want to renovate, we will still end up with something better than what we have now.

 

Timeline

 

            The committee discussed getting information on the three options suggested by Reed, holding informational meetings on them and holding a non binding vote at 2005 school meeting to give committee direction.

 

            The committee also discussed evaluating the Ed Fenn project, if the school board has no objections and possibly recommending that project be voted on at March 2005 school meeting.

 

            Patrick said that he needs to study the reports on the roofs. If they are at the crisis stage then the high school may have to be top priority.

            Jeff Stewart said that he would like to see the committee decide whether or not to recommend the Ed Fenn project by November but also be working on an informational presentation on the high school.

 

Other

 

Meeting Schedule

 

Monday July 19th – 6:00 PM at GMHS – David Provan presentation

Thursday August 5th - 6:00 PM at GMHS

Thursday August 19th – 6:00 PM at GMHS

 

Publicity

 

            Patrick said that it is very important how we respond about our meetings. He said that if the press is not present then the committee needs to agree who will speak to the press and what will be addressed.

 

            Patrick said that he will be meeting with Chad Dryden tomorrow and would like to speak about the committee beginning its work and setting goals. The committee agreed with this proposal.

 

Adjourn

 

            The meeting was adjourned at 9:34 PM.