Committee members present:

Reed Leberman, Chair            Jo Anne Carpenter         Robert Demers

Jeff Hill                                    Kathleen Kelley             Dennis Pednault

Jean Tremblay

 

Central Office Staff present:

Patrick Low, Superintendent             Pauline Plourde, Business Administrator

 

Public in attendance:

Paul Bousquet, Principal          Keith Parent, Principal

David Goyette, Head Maintenance

 

  1. Call to order at 6:36 p.m.
  2. Jo Anne Carpenter moved to approve the minutes as presented.  Motion seconded by Dennis Pednault.  Passed unanimously.
  3. Pauline Plourde has contacted Jordan Barker Architects to discuss whether they would be interested in working with the Ed Fenn Subcommittee to determine whether the estimates for renovation are reasonable.  They have a meeting set with Patrick Low and Pauline Plourde for October 28, 2004.  Patrick and Pauline will remind Jordan Barker that we will still need to follow a bid process for design and construction of the renovations.  Reed Leberman suggested that we may want to see some new high performance buildings built by different design firms in New Hampshire recently (examples given were Boscowan, Littleton High School, SPNF Building, Exeter School)
  4. The Committee is working well and with respect for each other.  Reed wanted to revisit the vote taken at the last meeting for the establishment of a subcommittee to look at the proposed renovation of the Ed Fenn in finer detail.  The committee discussed the complex realm we are working in, such as the impending COOP vote in March.  The committee also discussed the fact that although the scope of work at the Ed Fenn was fairly defined, the GMHS scope is still allusive.  We were reminded by Patrick Low that there is roofing and electrical projects that need to be accomplished in the GMHS during the next 8 to 16 months.  These must be done to keep the building operable until its renovation or replacement is brought on-line.
  5. We discussed the cost of demolishing the GMHS (unknown with the asbestos within the building and possible other hazardous materials).  We will rely on a late eighties analysis of the asbestos in the building and the current removal records to determine the process required to mitigate this hazard.  Jean Tremblay reminded the committee that Dan Hebert’s estimate of $7.5 million to rebuild on site included the cost of demolishing this building.  There have been three small buildings removed from the town in the past year that could be used as comparables for demolishing the adjacent properties purchased to increase the land mass of the GMHS site.  One reportedly cost $28,000 to demolish properly.  To get a better handle on the cost for demolition, we would have to go out for bids, and we are not ready to do this yet.
  6. The committee discussed the fact that two out of the nine members have not been in regular attendance and if we develop three subcommittees ( GMHS, Ed Fenn School, Focus Group/Information Gathering Committees) with just seven the work load will be unmanageable.  Pauline Plourde said that others could be added to the subcommittees, as long as one member from the Building Committee was present.   The group reaffirmed that they would like Keith Parent on the GMHS subcommittee if one is created and Paul Bousquet on the Ed Fenn Subcommittee. 
  7. Since we have been meeting for almost six months Reid Leberman will try to attend a Gorham School Board meeting to discuss the progress made to date.
  8. We discussed the expectations of the Gorham School Board for this committee, reiterating:
    1. The charge is to determine whether to renovate, reconstruct, or replace the current High / Middle School and the Edward Fenn buildings. 
    2. This means not only recommending action but also nailing down design, construction costs, construction management team, bonding requirements, zoning and site issues and developing community support for the recommended action.  It also means not proposing a project that costs more than the town can handle.
  9. There were differences of opinion on how to proceed, because clearly the high school has high priced pressing issues, but they are not as well defined.  Keith Parent and Dave Goyette prepared a list of renovations recommended for the GMHS, with price estimates where known, but a substantial amount of renovation costs were unknown at this time.   Dennis Pednault reminded the group that an architect or design or construction firm will give us estimates depending on how defined the project was.  For instance, if the project is not well defined and only a footprint available they would give a price plus or minus 30% of the costs.  If the project is well defined, they will be able to give a price plus or minus 10% of the costs.
  10. Jo Carpenter moved that we create two additional subcommittees: GMHS and Focus Group/ Public Information Gathering.  Bob Demers seconded the motion.   The goal of these committees would be to get more people involved in the discussion about what is best for the children and at the same time flush out details, such as what scope of work and what is the bond tolerance of the community.   After much discussion about whether we had enough information for a GMHS subcommittee to flush out the related details and options, a vote was taken five in favor and two opposed.  Motion carried.
  11. Dennis Pednault, Robert Demers and Jeff Hill volunteered for the Ed Fenn subcommittee.  Jean Tremblay volunteered for the GMHS subcommittee.  Jeff Stewart will be asked to participate on the GMHS subcommittee.  Kathleen Kelley and Jo Carpenter volunteered for the Focus Group subcommittee as well as Patrick Low.   Reed Leberman and Patrick Low would try to attend or keep on top of all three committees and Pauline Plourde will be available as needed. 
  12. Both of the other subcommittees need information from the Focus Group subcommittee to proceed and be successful in bringing forward a recommendation for the GSB to consider that is both realistic and meets the needs of the quality educational system.  The Focus Group should gather information from the community about:
    1. How much can the community support
    2. What important features to keep in a new or renovated GMHS or renovated Ed Fenn
    3. What do they want in the buildings looking forward
    4. What questions would you like answered by the building committee
    5. What questions do you have remaining from the last building committee presentation
  13. We need design help to finish specifying the Ed Fenn renovations and so we should ask for that in the budget for next year. We need money for flushing out the scope of work at the GMHS and maybe visiting other high performance schools.  We need money for the Focus Group Survey, postage, printing, coffee and donuts.  This budget request for July 1, 2005 should be presented to both the GSB and the COOP Planning Board.  If the COOP does go through this building committee will be their responsibility.  If the COOP does not go through GSB would still need to move forward with a building plan.  Regardless of which way the vote goes in March, we do not have enough time to propose a building project for the warrant in March 2005.  We need to stay focused on being ready to propose a building project or building projects for March 2006.  Therefore the recommendation and the related budgets have to be prepared before December 2005.  Reed Leberman has received information on Best Practices for High Performance Buildings that he is willing to share with anyone interested.
  14. The next meeting will be November 16 at 6:30 p.m. at Ed Fenn Library.  The subcommittees will meet immediately following that meeting.   We are urged to attend the public meeting on the COOP Articles of Agreement on November 4 at the Gorham Town Hall at 6:30 p.m.
  15. Jean Tremblay moved to adjourn; the motion was seconded by Bob Demers.  The motion was unanimously passed.