Agendas & Minutes

Winchester Board Education
Type of Meeting: Curriculum Committee Meeting Agenda
Date: Tuesday, September 25, 2018 @ 6:30 p.m.
Location: Town Hall, Blue Room

Meeting Facilitator: Nora Mocarski

Invitees: Melony Brady-Shanley, Jamie Duffy, Douglas Pfenninger, Alexandra Propfe, Nancy O’Dea-Wyrick, Barb Silverio, Rosanne Field, Seamus Cullinan

Quorum - Curriculum Committee - Quorum needed: 3

1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Open Issues
   1. Informational: Discussion on how the Little Owls program, School Readiness, and Head Start programs all work together.
4. Adjourn

Winchester Board Education
Type of Meeting: Curriculum Committee Meeting Agenda
Date: Tuesday, October 30, 2018, 6:30 pm.
Location: Town Hall, Blue Room

Meeting Facilitator: Nora Mocarski

Invitees: Melony Brady-Shanley, Douglas Pfenninger, Alexandra Propfe, Christine Royer, Nancy O’Dea Wyrick, Barb Silverio, Rosanne Field, Seamus Cullinan

Quorum - Curriculum Committee - Quorum needed: 3.

1. Call to Order
    
2. Roll Call
    
3. Open Issues
   a)  Presentation - Year 2 Science Roll Out
   b) Report out on October 5 PD - How did it go?
    
4. Future collaborative plans with Gilbert?
   c)  Walkthroughs including BOE? 
   d)  First impressions on SRBI Data
    
5. Adjourn

Winchester Board Education
Type of Meeting: Curriculum Committee Meeting Agenda
Date: Tuesday, November 27, 2018 @ 7:15pm
Location: Town Hall, Blue Room

Facilitator: N. Mocarski

Invitees: Melony Brady-Shanley, Douglas Pfenninger, Alexandra Propfe, Christine Royer, Nancy O’Dea Wyrick, Barb Silverio, Rosanne Field, Seamus Cullinan

Quorum - Curriculum Committee - Quorum needed: 3.

I.   Call to Order

II.  Roll Call

III. Open Issues

1. Report out on October 5 PD - How did it go? Cover during BOE Meeting
2. First impressions on SRBI Data – Next Curriculum Committee Agenda
3. Future collaborative plans with Gilbert
4. Reminder: Walkthroughs including BOE November 29, 2018, 8 AM -1 PM
   a.  purpose/targeted area 

IV.  Adjourn

Winchester Board Education
Type of Meeting: Curriculum Committee Meeting Agenda – Amended
Date: Thursday, January 31, 2019 @ 6:30 pm
Location: Town Hall, Blue Room

Facilitator: N. Mocarski

Invitees: Melony Brady-Shanley, Douglas Pfenninger, Alexandra Propfe, Christine Royer, Nancy O’Dea Wyrick, Barb Silverio, Rosanne Field, Seamus Cullinan

Quorum - Curriculum Committee - Quorum needed: 3.

I.   Call to Order

II.  Roll Call 

III. Open Issues
      A)    Update on ESSA since Devos has been in office
      B)    Update on performance of Decembers Assessments
              1) Dibels & NWEA assessment progress
      C)     Discussion of Hinsdale design and school instructional programs
      D)    1^st year employee conversation 

V.         Adjourn

HINSDALE SCHOOL RENOVATION COMMITTEE
AGENDA FOR INITIAL MEETING
Date:  JULY 23, 2018 @ 6:00 pm
Location:  HICKS ROOM - TOWN HALL

I     CALL TO ORDER

II    SWEARING IN OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Sheila Sedlack)

III   ROLL CALL
 

IV   INTRODUCTIONS AMONG MEMBERS
 

V    SUMMARY OF PROCESS TO DATE   D. PFENNINGER
            Packets distributed and list of other documents available to committee
 

VI   ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITIES - minutes, posting meetings, etc.  D Pfenninger, Melony Brady-Shanley
 

VII  CHARGE OF THE COMMITTEE   (with proposed timeline) D Pfenninger
             Document describing charge distributed
 

VIII DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL PROCESS AND NEXT STEPS   - Melony Brady-Shanley
 

IX   QUESTIONS AND DISCUSSION
 

X    ELECTION OF OFFICERS?
 

XI   SCHEDULING OF NEXT MEETING

Winchester Board of Education
Type of Meeting: Hinsdale Renovation Committee Meeting Agenda
Date:  July 30, 2018 @ 6:00 p.m.
Location:  Town Hall – Blue Room
Meeting Facilitator:  Steven Frazier, Chair
                                  Dave Carter, Vice Chair      

Invitees: M. Bird, M. Shanley-Brady, D. Denning, R. Geiger, M. Hintz, N. Kelly, N. O’Dea, C. Perez, D. Pfenninger, M. Ruzbason, T. Sandonato, B. Stratford, and S. Vaill

I.      Call to order

II.      Roll call

III.      New Business

a)      Review RFP Draft  

Adjournment

Winchester Board of Education
Type of Meeting: Hinsdale Renovation Committee Meeting Agenda - Amended
Date:  September 17, 2018 @ 6:00 p.m.
Location:  Town Hall – Blue Room
Meeting Facilitator:  Steven Frazier, Chair
                                  Dave Carter, Vice Chair      

Invitees: M. Bird, M. Shanley-Brady, D. Denning, R. Geiger, M. Hintz, N. Kelly, N. O’Dea, C. Perez, D. Pfenninger, M. Ruzbason, T. Sandonato, B. Stratford, and S. Vaill

I.      Call to order

II.      Roll call

III.      New Business
          a)      Develop Interview Questions
          b)      Review 
          c)      Discussion of the pipe that runs under Hinsdale into the Mad River

IV.      Adjournment

Winchester Board of Education
Type of Meeting: Hinsdale Renovation Committee Meeting Agenda
Date:  September 27, 2018 @ 6:00 p.m.
Location:  Town Hall – Blue Room
Meeting Facilitator:  Steven Frazier, Chair
                                  Dave Carter, Vice Chair      

Invitees: M. Bird, M. Shanley-Brady, D. Denning, R. Geiger, M. Hintz, N. Kelly, N. O’Dea, C. Perez, D. Pfenninger, M. Ruzbason, T. Sandonato, B. Stratford, and S. Vaill

I.      Call to order

II.      Roll call

III.      New Business

a)      Review Architect responses and select firms for interview.

Adjournment

HINSDALE SCHOOL RENOVATION COMMITTEE MEETING
OCTOBER 11, 2018 AT 5:30 PM
BLUE ROOM – TOWN HALL

1. ROLL CALL

2. INTERVIEW OF ARCHITECTURE FIRMS

A. FRIAR – 5:30 PM

B. PERKINS EASTMAN – 6:30 PM

C. QA AND M – 7:30 PM

3. ADJOURNMENT

HINSDALE SCHOOL RENOVATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA
OCTOBER 15, 2018 AT 6:00 – 8:00 p.m.
BLUE ROOM – TOWN HALL

1. ROLL CALL

2. INTERVIEW OF ARCHITECTURE FIRMS

A. Sevigny @ 6:00 p.m.

B. Perkins Eastman @ 7:30 p.m.

3. ADJOURNMENT

Winchester Board of Education
Type of Meeting: Hinsdale Renovation Committee Meeting Agenda
Date:  October 23, 2018 @ 6:00 p.m.
Location:  Town Hall – Blue Room
Meeting Facilitator:  Steven Frazier, Chair
                                Dave Carter, Vice Chair      

Invitees: M. Bird, M. Shanley-Brady, D. Denning, R. Geiger, M. Hintz, N. Kelly, N. O’Dea, C. Perez, D. Pfenninger, M. Ruzbason, T. Sandonato, B. Stratford, and S. Vaill

I.       Call to order

II.      Roll call

III.     New Business
         a)      Possible selection of pre-referendum selection of Architecture service.

Adjournment

HINSDALE SCHOOL RENOVATION COMMITTEE MEETING
OCTOBER 29, 2018 AT 6:00 PM
BLUE ROOM – TOWN HALL
 

1. Roll Call
    
2. Business
   a) Initial planning meeting with Silver, Petrucelli, and Associates.
    
3. Adjournment

HINSDALE SCHOOL RENOVATION COMMITTEE MEETING
November 20, 2018, AT 6:00 PM
BLUE ROOM – TOWN HALL

Meeting Facilitator:  Steven Frazier, Chair
                                     Dave Carter, Vice Chair      

Invitees: M. Bird, M. Shanley-Brady, D. Denning, R. Geiger, M. Hintz, N. Kelly, N. O’Dea, C. Perez, D. Pfenninger, M. Ruzbason, T. Sandonato, B. Stratford, and S. Vaill

1.      Roll Call

2.      Business
         a)       Update from Design Team
                   1)    Update Schedule.
                   2)    Meeting minutes & first pass floor plan based on programming meeting/goals.
                   3)    Facility conditions update based on initial architects/engineer’s field visits.
                   4)    Initial site plan options based on civil engineer’s discussion with town engineer.
                   5)    Next steps.
3.      Adjournment

HINSDALE SCHOOL RENOVATION COMMITTEE MEETING
December 17, 2018, AT 6:00 PM
BLUE ROOM – TOWN HALL

Meeting Facilitator:  Steven Frazier, Chair
                                     Dave Carter, Vice Chair      

Invitees: M. Bird, M. Shanley-Brady, D. Denning, R. Geiger, M. Hintz, N. Kelly, N. O’Dea, C. Perez, D. Pfenninger, M. Ruzbason, T. Sandonato, B. Stratford, and S. Vaill

1.      Roll Call

2.      Business
        a)      Floor plan review
        b)      Site plan options/discussions
        c)      Facility conditions update based on architects/engineer’s field visits.
        d)      Opinion of probable construction cost
        e)      Schedule/Next steps.

3.       Adjournment

HINSDALE SCHOOL RENOVATION COMMITTEE MEETING
JANUARY 28, 2019, AT 6:00 PM
BLUE ROOM – TOWN HALL

Meeting Facilitator:  Steven Frazier, Chair
                                 Dave Carter, Vice Chair      

Invitees: M. Bird, M. Shanley-Brady, D. Denning, R. Geiger, M. Hintz, N. Kelly, N. O’Dea, C. Perez, D. Pfenninger, M. Ruzbason, T. Sandonato, B. Stratford, and S. Vaill

1.      Roll Call
2.      Business – Update from Design Team
         a)      Recap of our last meeting
         b)      Update on meeting with the State of Ct, School Construction grants on 1/23/19
         c)      Space Standards discussion (including directive from the State)
         d)      Floor plan impact & initial concepts
         e)      Updated estimates based on above information
         f)       Next steps
         h)      Approve invoices           

3.       Adjournment

HINSDALE SCHOOL RENOVATION COMMITTEE MEETING
Wednesday, February 13, 2019, AT 6:00 PM
BLUE ROOM – TOWN HALL

Meeting Facilitator:  Steven Frazier, Chair
                                Dave Carter, Vice Chair      

Invitees: M. Bird, M. Shanley-Brady, D. Denning, R. Geiger, M. Hintz, N. Kelly, N. O’Dea, C. Perez, D. Pfenninger, M. Ruzbason, T. Sandonato, B. Stratford, and S. Vaill

1.      Roll Call

2.      Business – Update from Design Team
         a)      Revised floor plan review
         b)      Revised site plan review
         c)      Revised Opinion of probable construction cost review
         d)      Schedule/Next steps.      

3.      Adjournment

Winchester Board of Education
Type of Meeting: Finance Committee Meeting Agenda
Location:  Town Hall 338 Main Street Winsted, CT - Blue Room
Date:  Tuesday, September 25, 2018 @ 8:00 p.m.

Meeting Facilitator: Melony Brady-Shanley, Superintendent
                                 Nancy O’Dea-Wyrick, Director of Finance

Invitees: Michelle Hintz, Nora Mocarski, Doug Pfenninger, Cheryl Heffernan, and Jamie Duffy.

Call to order

I.      Roll call

II.      Approval of Agenda

III.      New business
a)      Tuition for students attending WPS from out of town
b)      2017-2018 Year end close out
c)      Alliance Building Grant from the Department of Administrative Services (DAS)

IV.      Adjourn

Winchester Board of Education
Type of Meeting: Finance Committee Meeting Agenda
Location:  Town Hall 338 Main Street Winsted, CT - Blue Room
Date:  Tuesday, October 30, 2018 @ 8:00 p.m.

Meeting Facilitator: Melony Brady-Shanley, Superintendent
                               Nancy O’Dea-Wyrick, Director of Finance

Invitees: Michelle Hintz, Nora Mocarski, Doug Pfenninger, and Cheryl Heffernan.

Call to order

I.      Roll call

II.      Approval of Agenda

III.      New business
         a)     Year to date budget update
         b)     Anticipated expense changes for special education
         c)     Anticipated facilities projects
         d)     Teacher Negotiations update

IV.      Adjourn

Winchester Board of Education
Type of Meeting: Finance Committee Meeting Agenda
Location:  Town Hall 338 Main Street Winsted, CT - Blue Room
Date:  Tuesday, December 18, 2018 @ 6:15 p.m.

Meeting Facilitator: Melony Brady-Shanley, Superintendent
                                 Nancy O’Dea-Wyrick, Director of Finance

Invitees: Michelle Hintz, Nora Mocarski, Doug Pfenninger, Kristen Peterson, Shana DeVoux, Chris Royer, Richard Dutton, Alexia Propfe, and Cheryl Heffernan.

Call to order

I.      Roll call

II.      Approval of Agenda

III.      New business
          a)      Fiscal Year 2019 Timelines
          b)      Update on Negotiations
          c)      Open Discussion

IV.      Adjourn

Winchester Board of Education
Type of Meeting: Finance Committee Meeting Agenda - AMENDED
Location:  Town Hall 338 Main Street Winsted, CT - Blue Room
Date:  Thursday, January 31, 2019 @ 8:00 p.m.

Meeting Facilitator: Melony Brady-Shanley, Superintendent
                               Nancy O’Dea-Wyrick, Director of Finance

Invitees: Michelle Hintz, Nora Mocarski, Doug Pfenninger, Kristen Peterson, Shana DeVoux, Chris Royer, Richard Dutton, Alexia Propfe, and Cheryl Heffernan.

Call to order

I.    Roll call

II.   Approval of Agenda

III.  New Business
      a)      Gilbert Contract  
      b)      2020 Budget

IV.   Adjourn

Winchester Board of Education
Type of Meeting: Policy Committee Meeting Agenda
Location:  Town Hall – Blue Room
Date:  September 25, 2018 @ 7:15 p.m.
Meeting Facilitator: Michelle Hintz

Invitees: D. Pfenninger, N. O’Dea-Wyrick,  M. Brady-Shanley, N. Mocarski, S. DeVoux, J. Duffy, C. Heffernan, A. Propfe, C. Royer

I.      Call to order

II.      Roll call

III.      Open issues

a)      Development of Social Media By-Laws for BOE Members

IV.      New business

a)      Review policies P5114, P5141.3, P5141.4, P5144.1

V.      Adjournment

Winchester Board of Education
Type of Meeting: Policy Committee Meeting Agenda - AMENDED
Location:  Town Hall – Blue Room
Date:  October 30, 2018 @ 7:15 p.m.
Meeting Facilitator: Michelle Hintz

Invitees: D. Pfenninger, N. O’Dea-Wyrick,  M. Brady-Shanley, N. Mocarski, S. DeVoux, C. Heffernan, A. Propfe, and C. Royer.

I.      Call to order

II.      Roll call

III.      Approval of minutes from last meeting

IV.      Open issues
          a)      None

V.      New business
          a)      Review policies P5114, P5141.3, P5141.4, P5144.1
          b)      Social Media
          c)      Policy 4000.1 (Title 9)

VI.      Adjournment

Winchester Board of Education
Type of Meeting: Policy Committee Meeting Agenda - AMENDED Date Change
Location:  Town Hall – Blue Room
Date:  Thursday, January 31, 2019 @ 7:15 p.m.
Meeting Facilitator: Michelle Hintz

Invitees: D. Pfenninger, N. O’Dea-Wyrick,  M. Brady-Shanley, N. Mocarski, S. DeVoux, C. Heffernan, A. Propfe, and C. Royer

I.      Call to order

II.      Roll call

III.      Approval of minutes from the last meeting

IV.      Open issues

V.      New business
a)      5141.3
b)      5141.4
c)      5144.1
d)      5144.4

VI.      Adjournment

HINSDALE SCHOOL RENOVATION COMMITTEE
MINUTES FOR INITIAL MEETING
Date: JULY 23, 2018 @ 6:00 pm
Location: HICKS ROOM - TOWN HALL

I CALL TO ORDER - Doug Pfenninger 6:00 PM

II SWEARING IN OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Sheila Sedlack) - Shelia Sedlack performed swearing in for David, Steven F., Tony, Dale, Norman, Steven V., Michael

III ROLL CALL - Doug Pfenninger, Michelle Hintz, Nancy O’Dea-Wyrick, David Carter, Steven Frazier, Tony Sandonato, Dale Denning, Norman Kelly, Steven Vaill, Bruce Stratford, Michael Ruzbasan

IV INTRODUCTIONS AMONG MEMBERS - All members introduced themselves and shared their personal and/or professional experience.

V SUMMARY OF PROCESS TO DATE D. PFENNINGER
Packets distributed and a list of other documents available to the committee

Each member received a binder that included previously analyzed reports.

VI ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITIES - minutes, posting meetings, etc. D Pfenninger, Melony Brady-Shanley

VII PUBLIC COMMENT - Steven Sedlack - Thank you to the entire committee and appreciation for the expertise of the building committee.

VIII CHARGE OF THE COMMITTEE (with proposed timeline) D Pfenninger

Document describing charge distributed.  D. Pfenninger describes the historical issues that have faced the district with regards to school closures. He addressed the Receiver closing Hinsdale due to the belief of mold; Receiver did not “turn the building back over to the town.” Town formed a committee to find a way to repurpose Hinsdale. No one was interested in the purchase of the property and demolition would be about $700,000. At no point did the building get returned to the town. BOE has maintained the building since the closure. Receivers encouraged BOE to look at both Batcheller and Hinsdale. CREC was hired to review all documents associated with Hinsdale. The report indicated that Hinsdale would be a better choice for renovation. Ad Hoc Committee made a formal recommendation that we renovate Hinsdale. BOE approved this recommendation. BOS in July 2018 established a Renovation Committee for Hinsdale.

The obligation to provide a sound educational system in the town. Benefits both town and school. Good, clean, up to date building is an important part of the solution. The town has not maintained school buildings in quite some time. With a fairly modest budget, we can create a sound school building at Hinsdale.

Tonight or the next meeting, you will elect your officials.

Review of the charge, and Statement of Need

IX DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL PROCESS AND NEXT STEPS - Melony Brady-Shanley

Melony reviewed the Mystic Air Quality Reports and explained the sequence and process of testing. The committee engaged in conversation regarding Air Quality and new system requirements to ensure routine air quality testing.

Melony reviewed the DRAFT of the Request for Proposals. A few members of the committee volunteered to assist with formally DRAFTING the RFP for consideration at Monday, July 30, 2018 meeting. The committee has determined, they will include energy-saving opportunities in the RFP for investigation.

X QUESTIONS AND DISCUSSION

XI ELECTION OF OFFICERS

Chair - Nomination of Chair Steven Fraizer - Unanimous

Vice Chair - Dave Carter - Unanimous

XII SCHEDULING OF NEXT MEETING

6:00 PM on July 30, 2018 - Blue Room

RFP Development Session - Thursday, July 26, 2018, 4th Floor, 9:00 A.M.

Friday, July 27, 2018 - Committee Walkthrough of Hinsdale

Winchester Board of Education
Type of Meeting: Hinsdale Renovation Committee Meeting Minutes
Date:  July 30, 2018 @ 6:00 p.m.
Location:  Town Hall – Blue Room
Meeting Facilitator:  Steven Frazier, Chair
                                  Dave Carter, Vice Chair      

Invitees: M. Bird, M. Shanley-Brady, D. Denning, R. Geiger, M. Hintz, N. Kelly, N. O’Dea, C. Perez, D. Pfenninger, M. Ruzbason, T. Sandonato, B. Stratford, and S. Vaill

I.      Call to order – 6:02 PM

II.      Roll call – Melissa B., Nancy OW, Norman K, Tony S, Doug P, Michelle H, Melony BS, Steve V., Steve F. Bob G., Dave C.

III.      New Business

a)      Review RFP Draft  

b)      Mr. Frazier instructed the team to review the document.

c)      All questions that arise during the bid process will be directed to Mr. Frazier.

d)      Discussion took place regarding timing with bid dates and completion goals.

e)      August 10 – 2:30 PM – Walkthrough

f)       Questions Due by Friday, August 31, 2018

g)      September 17^th – Next Meeting – Agenda – Develop Interview Questions and Review Bids

h)      September 10^th Monday – Bids Due

i)       Monday, September 24 and Tuesday, September 25– Architects to be interviewed

j)       Friday, September 28 – Selection Announcement

k)      Friday, November 16 – Architect Completion

b) Melissa and Bob to research and report out for next meeting on Referendum Timeline.

c) Research must be done regarding the potential permanent closure of the water access door in the basement of Hinsdale.

IV.      Adjournment – 7:21 PM

V.      Next Meeting -

Winchester Board of Education
Type of Meeting: Hinsdale Renovation Committee Meeting Minutes
Date:  September 27, 2018 @ 6:00 p.m.
Location:  Town Hall – Blue Room
Meeting Facilitator:  Steven Frazier, Chair
                                 Dave Carter, Vice Chair      

Invitees: M. Bird, M. Shanley-Brady, D. Denning, R. Geiger, M. Hintz, N. Kelly, N. O’Dea, C. Perez, D. Pfenninger, M. Ruzbason, T. Sandonato, B. Stratford, D. Carter, and S. Vaill

I. Call to order 

II. Roll call - M. Brady-Shanley, D. Denning, M. Hintz, N. Kelly, M. Ruzbason, T. Sandonato, B. Stratford, S. Vaill, S. Carter

III. Public Comment - No public comment

IV. New Business

a)  Review Bids - Committee took 10 minutes to review the submitted bid questions.

S. Carter shared his concerns that he thought the bids did not have a final number. Clarity was provided by the committee to explain the purpose of this process (phase 1) in preparation for a referendum with at cost and scope of work that would most accurately reflect the bottom line.

Frazier - stated that the purpose is to come up with a cost estimate to renovate Hinsdale. The committee felt the architects did answer the clarifying questions.

Took an additional 5 minutes to review

Tecton - Committee felt Tecton did not present a strong support plan regarding hydrology and remediation. Dismissed from process

Motion made by Frazier - Carter - 1st, Sandonato 2nd - 8-0

QA and M - Will be invited for an interview

Silver, Petrucelli, and Associates - Will be invited for an interview

Friar - Will be invited for an interview

Perkins Eastman - Will be invited for an interview

Sevigny - Will be invited for an interview

b)  Develop Interview Questions - October 4, 2018, at 6 PM

Interviews will be held on: October 11, 2018 - 5:30 PM Friar, 6:30 PM Perkins Eastman, 7:30 PM QA and M

October 15, 2018 - 6:00 PM Sevigny and 7:00 PM Silver

V. Adjournment - 7:00 PM

Winchester Board of Education
Type of Meeting: Hinsdale Renovation Committee Meeting Minutes
Date: September 17, 2018 @ 6:00 p.m.
Location: Town Hall – Blue Room

Meeting Facilitator: Steven Frazier - Chair, Dave Carter - Vice Chair
Invitees: M. Bird, M. Brady-Shanley, D. Denning, R. Geiger, M. Hintz, N. Kelly, N.
O’Dea, C. Perez, D. Pfenninger, M. Ruzbason, T. Sandonato, B. Stratford, and S. Vaill

I. Call to order - 6:00 p.m. Carter - Motion, Sandonato 2nd
   Pledge of Allegiance

II. Roll call - Brady-Shanley, O’Dea-Wyrick, Hintz, Carter, Denning, Kelly, Perez, Sandonato, Vaill, Stratford, Bird.

III. Public Comment - Two members were present in the audience, however, did not speak during official public comment but asked questions during the meeting that were addressed.

IV. New Business
a) Review Bids
Nancy distributed the spreadsheet with information about the Cost of Referendum. She reviewed the titles and what each column means. Committee took time to review the summary sheet that Nancy developed. Nancy noted that fewer exclusions were better for purchase. Importance of flood certification was noted.

I. Friar - Need to clarify what the phase 1 services are. Will attend meetings with the school. Need a price associated with their work beyond the initial amount of $45,000.

II. Perkins Eastman - In phase 2 and 3 credit would be given back assuming a successful referendum. Listed all the other consulting firms associated with their work. Their phase 1 work includes facilities assessment, education program development, community forums, and information session. Develop specific assist with Office of School Construction and Grants, Prepare conceptual designs, develop a project schedule, estimate costs and budget, provide town meeting and referendum support.

III. QA and M - Excluded hazmat and environmental testing and geotechnical services. They have a group of support staff to support the project. They also did not specify what services were included in Phase 1. No numerics presented on phase 2 and 3.

V. Sevigny - Exclusions included mailing, and their documents are for their sole use in this process. They did provide a list of consultants; specific information was provided regarding phase 1 proposal. That included: project management, inventory of existing conditions, field measurements, code study, HVAC, bathroom renovations, water drainage, exterior security, structural engineering, roof, solar panels, ADA requirements, construction costs, schematic design report, a community presentation, referendum package.

VI. Silver Petrucelli and Associates - Costs were associated in addition to work in phase 1. Did not specify phase 1 services. They did provide phase 2 and 3 numbers. They have a full staff of project support team members.

VII. Tecton - Exclusions included: Hazmat, geotechnical, environmental, hazardous material, investigation, analysis, demographic projections. Have a team of support members. Did not provide Phase 2 and 3 numbers. Did not include a list of phase 1 services.

b) Develop Interview Questions
The committee needs to forward interview questions to Melony by Wednesday, September 19, 2018. Melony will develop a question sheet and forward to the Chair and Vice Chair for approval. Following the approval, Melony will send out to the six firms. The six firms will have until 12 PM on September 27, 2018, to respond. Interviews with selected firms will be October 4, 2018

c) Next Meeting will be on September 27, 2018, in the Hicks Room at 6 PM.

V. Adjournment - 8:07 PM

Winchester Board of Education
Type of Meeting: Hinsdale Renovation Committee Meeting Minutes
Date:  October 11, 2018 @ 5:30 p.m.
Location:  Town Hall – Blue Room

Meeting Facilitators:  Steven Frazier - Chair, Dave Carter - Vice Chair     

Committee Members: M. Bird, M. Shanley-Brady, D. Denning, R. Geiger, M. Hintz, N. Kelly, N. O’Dea, C. Perez, D. Pfenninger, M. Ruzbason, T. Sandonato, B. Stratford, D. Carter, and S. Vaill

Present:

I. Call to order at 5:30 PM

II. Roll call - M. Brady-Shanley, N. O’Dea-Wyrick, M. Bird, D. Denning, D. Carter, M. Ruzbason, S. Frazier, D. Pfenninger, N. Kelly, T. Sandonato,

III. New Business

The Interview Process was read before all interview was started.

1. 5:30 PM - Friar Interview/Presentation
   1. Exterior Updates - Theme of “clock building” not expanding the square footage. Shared renderings of exterior options.
   2. Construction Estimate Approach - All “yellow” will not be reimbursed by the state. “White” believed to be reimbursed through the state. Looked at an apply price based on recent construction bids, apply soft costs, grants, etc.
   3. Site Analysis - Flood Plain Analysis - A survey has been completed from the Mad River to Hinsdale. Stone lined tunnels, large chambers, Preliminary analysis of hydrology has been done. Suggesting a pre-referendum flood management strategy. Work with the state before the referendum. This firm feels this is imperative to this process. Study alternative solutions to control water flow. This would be in partnership with DEEP and School Construction. Grant funding through FEMA will be investigated.
   4. Traffic Flow - Bus Drop-off and Pickup at Main School Entrance. Move the playground to the side of the building and move parking into the field. This will also play into the flood proofing process.
   5. Mechanical Engineers - Energy efficient, looking at perimeter radiation and Variable Air Volume and reheat boxes. Investigate all systems.
   6. Community Outreach - Work with parents/leaders, community events, educate the community, develop a message, polling, building consensus.
   7. OSCGR - input begins early, site analysis/design, renovation cost analysis - All completed pre-referendum.
   8. Single bond vs. Multiple projects - Analyzed to see which way will save us more money in reimbursable costs.
   9. Referendum - complete conceptual design, finalize the budget, fine-tune marketing material, align message.
   10. Client Portal - to access for school leaders and community.
   11. Why Friar - 40 years of experience, focused on Connecticut Schools, recent referendum success. 1.5 million sq. ft. of design work - 98% have been public schools.
   12. Directly Answered the questions
       1. Confident to bring in cost estimate within 10%.
       2. Engineering/construction support - have experience in this particular area.
       3. Value engineering - After the referendum, will provide alternate projects/materials. Cost reduction - through the way of alternative options. Cost estimator is experienced and accurate. June 30, 2019 application to the OSCGR (priority project).
           
2. 6:30 PM - Perkins Eastman Interview/Presentation
   1. The statement was read to the committee.
   2. The firm focuses on school design. In the past 15 years, completed 22 elementary schools in excess of 15 billion. Shared local projects that have been completed. The firm has written several white papers and books on school design and concepts.
   3. Introductions - Perkins Eastman team was introduced.
   4. Project Understanding - Shared main concerns with the site and what the team would like to see addressed. Establish a solution to address remediation needs. Mechanical systems will be addressed (ventilation and air condition). Reviewed the available area for construction. Mechanical and building upgrades.
   5. Visioning Process - Core Educational Leadership Team, design working group, and community groups.  Next move into goals and best practices, design and guiding principle become an educational specification. They shared “who” we are designing for.
   6. Safe, secure, and scaled - scale studies, welcoming entries, identity, interactive walls, numbered stairs, talking tubes, natural light, reflection, imagination, exploration, manipulation, experimentation. Will be provided with an educational program and space summary.
   7. OSGR - starting the conversation early and how we can get the most reimbursed costs.
   8. Following the development of the Educational Specification - Ensuring that students have inspiring spaces for scale, strength, cognitive, and problem-solving. Students would have access to neighborhoods in the school building, connections to the outdoors, security, building zones in classrooms. In 1st and 2nd grade, lockers would be in the hallway; students will foster pride, teamwork, collaboration, and manipulation in the space. All spaces would be “flexible.”
   9. Neighborhood Context - Site design, neighborhood “look” - church, Main Street, residential housing, commercial. Has a constrained space.
   10. Traffic Flow - will be addressed through a circulation analysis. Defining campus edges, exterior security would be addressed, accessibility would be addressed, and the physical condition would be addressed. Drainage and stream remediation.
   11. Remediation - Options would include - reroute culvert, remove the second floor of the building and open a corridor between the two. Drainage issues would be addressed in this model. Culvert - close the door off and waterproof the area. Move drainage away from the curb line. Flooding has two issue
   12. Energy Usage - looking at getting the energy costs to 1.21 per square foot
   13. Mold - Humidity causes mold, 30-50% humidity is the goal, looking into an ultraviolet light and cooling coils.
   14. Schedule and Cost - Development meetings begin immediately with the state. Estimated completion of January 2021. ED049 submission before June 2019. Estimating construction to be about 12 months.
   15. Budget - Never had a project exceed a proposed budget within 1%. Never missed a project opening date.
   16. Community Outreach - Did not present, ran out of time

3. 7:30 PM - QA & M Interview/Presentation
   1. The interview process was read to the team.
   2. Introduction of team members
   3. 30 years working with K 12 schools. As a team, they have worked together for 15 years on more than 30 different projects. Full-service firm 34 full-time employees, specialized in academic and elementary projects, and some educators on staff. Transparent approach to the process - building committee, town management, WBOE, the flow of information would be shared with all stakeholders. Weekly meetings would be required.
   4. OSCGR - work collaboratively with state, work with cost buckets, the goal would be the highest reimbursement possible. Allowable square footage would be 30,132 sq. ft. Entertain - Renovate as New. There is three different ways to look at reimbursement - guidelines (formula for sq. ft), grant application, law.
   5. Approach to the project - Address site issues (drainage, parking, circulation), Hazmat, environmental, security, ADA, HVAC, Building systems, technology, roof, finishes, etc. Key issues are flooding management, drainage, parking, student drop off, site accessibility, neighboring properties. Presented a drainage map that effects Hinsdale. Looked at liabilities to the building - Need to ensure that the building is the right size for the enrollment. Address Hazmat preconstruction. One idea would be to remove the older section of the building. Add a new section of the building on the right side. One level building that would not need an elevator.
   6. Mechanical - Identify system options, possible reuse of current systems, energy efficient, need to build system to control humidity coming into the building.
   7. Presented renderings.
   8. Budget Management - Cost estimate professional, within 10% of the estimate. The Educational Specification is part of the scope of work. Looking at renovating as new vs. alteration project costs.
   9. Cost Reductions - Ensure project comes in on budget. Work with the building committee on cost estimate, cost budgeting, and cost control.
   10. Referendum Support - Communication, establish a vision, community engagement, informational campaign, deliver the project to approval. Inclusive, transparent, compelling, easily understood, etc. Material support for visioning.
   11. Schedule - QA & M - they can meet their schedule.

IV. Adjournment at 8:55 PM

HINSDALE SCHOOL RENOVATION COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES
OCTOBER 15, 2018 AT 6:00 – 8:00 p.m.
BLUE ROOM – TOWN HALL
Opened at 6:05 PM

1. ROLL CALL - Tony S., David F. Melony B.S., Doug P., Michelle H., David C, Nancy O, Steve V., Dale D., Norman K.

2. INTERVIEW OF ARCHITECTURE FIRMS

A. Sevigny @ 6:00 p.m.

1. One presenter tonight. The team has prepared a package to share tonight. Established in 1986. Philosophy to act as the client’s advocate. A team approach to design. 32 years in business. The team will include Sevigny, mechanical, landscape, structural, construction estimator, civil engineering. Previous projects - Kent Center School Project, Housatonic Valley Regional High School, Warner Theatre Renovations all projects of Sevigny Architects.
2. Project Approach - Three Phases - Phase 1 - To get approvals and referendum. Phase 2 - Get to construction, Phase 3 - Construction Administration to completion (We are only considering Phase 1 at this point).
3. Process - New roof/electrical/plumbing and air conditioning, ADA Compliance, New Security, New Site Improvement (pacing, drainage, bus drop off and pick up), New Interior Finishes, New Exterior Entrance Identity. Six main areas to address in the project.
4. The scope of Work - Accessibility, Elevator (exterior, not necessary for ADA), Interior Finishes (painting of existing, ceiling tiles, accent colors), Cabinet Finishes (configuration), Signage (wayfinding throughout the building), Emergency Generator (cost but necessary, need to find an appropriate location)
5. Challenges - Site Surface Drainage (waterproof boiler room) need to address the pitch of the roadway, new catch basins, security, air conditioning (not just ducted, piped, will need to address ceiling height), Solar panels (structural capacity may need to be addressed)
6. Response to questions - A2 survey needed, will present at community meetings, etc.
7. Project Cost Estimate will guarantee within 10%+-.
8. Engineering and Construction Support Team will be in place
9. Cost Reduction Opportunities - Bring to the building committee alternatives, recommendations, and will follow the direction of the building committee.
10. Reductions/Efficiencies - Alternatives will be presented to the committee.
11. Monitor Costs/Budget - Project cost associated with the referendum
12. Time and Budget - Can commence work immediately with Sevigny
13. Why Sevigny - Trust, confidence, listen, and solve concerns.
14. Q and A - Solar potential to supplement electric (but there is a significant weight load that would need to be addressed with the roof). Consider Geothermal Wells rather than solar.

B.  Silver Petrucelli @ 7:00 p.m.

1. 47 architects, six engineers, designers, all in-house work, no subcontractors. Don Smith will be the civil engineer on the project.
2. In-House Services - Architecture, electrical, plumbing, security, code work, etc.
3. Previously worked on Hinsdale - gym and cafe floor issues, completed the roof project at Pearson (have done six projects at Pearson).
4. Completed jobs - Fairfield (with students occupied), Stratfield Elementary School, Chatfield-LoPresti School, Crystal Lake School, Gallup Hill Elementary School, Enfield High School
5. Programming design work would be part of the scope - color and finish selection completed by committee.
6. Engineering - review current systems, the capacity of utilities, develop a baseline. MEP options, specialized ventilation. Review of code. LEED knowledge to integrate green concepts.
7. State reimbursement process and analysis. We will need to meet high-performance codes for SDE reimbursement. Energy models will be completed.
8. Options - review different heating, cooling, and energy systems.
9. Project Understanding - Site Improvements (parking, walking, and drainage), Site Access (busses, emergency, and parent pick up/drop off), Building Improvements - security, communication, roof, paint, HVAC improvement (boilers, fuel tank removal, backup generator), Hazardous materials, etc.
10. Design concepts - integrated learning, clusters, pods, extended learning areas, STEAM, natural light, etc.
11. Estimating will be done in-house. Usually with 2-7% accurate. The average of all projects has come in at .8% of the original bid. 
12. Value Engineering - budget review, and then pick what makes the most for your project.

3. ADJOURNMENT - 7:54 PM

Next meeting scheduled for Tuesday, October 23, 2018, at 6 PM in the Blue Room at Town Hall.

Winchester Board of Education
Type of Meeting: Hinsdale Renovation Committee Meeting Minutes
Date:  October 23, 2018 @ 6:00 p.m.
Location:  Town Hall – Blue Room
Meeting Facilitator:  Steven Frazier, Chair
                                Dave Carter, Vice Chair      

Invitees: M. Bird, M. Shanley-Brady, D. Denning, R. Geiger, M. Hintz, N. Kelly, N. O’Dea, C. Perez, D. Pfenninger, M. Ruzbason, T. Sandonato, B. Stratford, and S. Vaill

I.         Call to order – 6:04 PM

II.         Roll Call - M. Bird, M. Shanley-Brady, R. Geiger, M. Hintz, N. Kelly, N. O’Dea, D.   Pfenninger, T. Sandonato, B. Stratford, D. Carter, M. Ruzbason, D. Denning, and S. Vaill

III.       New Business
           1)     Possible selection of pre-referendum selection of Architecture service.

2)     Michelle Hintz made a motion to rate the top firms – Tony Sandonato 2^nd.        Silver Petrucelli and Associates, and QA & M were the top two

Committee decided there was no need to consider a third firm. 

QA and M

• Critical Path
• Could not meet current schedule
• Relocation – Project Costs
• Exclusions are a concern – HAZMAT Testing, Environmental, Geotechnical
• Concerned about square footage allowance and removing part of the building as a solution.
• Student’s involvement in the process and decision-making.
• Within 10% of costs historically.
• Addressed parking and traffic patterns.
• More focused on the program versus the scope of work.

Silver Petrucelli

• All services in-house. 47 Engineers
• Proof of final costs come in between 2-7% of actual costs.
• They provided their average square foot cost.
• Solution to address smaller square footage allowance for grants.
• History of completing projects in town.
• Connection to town/presence in the community.
• Addressed parking and traffic patterns.
• Will work within the parameters of the project funds.
• Silver had a strong presentation.
• Strong track record, 30 projects of the state, 80% of the work in schools. High-performance grants experience.
• Cost focused presentation.

3)  Motion made by David Carter to perform a vote for Silver Petrucelli and Associates for the Hinsdale Pre-Referendum Services. 2^nd Motion Michelle Hintz

Yes – 8, No – 0, Abstain – 0

4. Friendly Amendment to the motion to confirm the scope and costs that our vote is contingent upon verification of scope and cost ($38,500). Amendment was made by Michelle Hintz, 2^nd David Carter – 8-0 approved. Melony Brady-Shanley following the meeting confirmed the price in the presence of Doug Pfenninger, Michelle Hintz, and Nancy O’Dea-Wyrick.

5. Next meeting date will be Monday, October 29, 2018, at 6:00 PM.

IV. Adjournment at 7:05 PM

HINSDALE SCHOOL RENOVATION COMMITTEE MEETING- MINUTES
OCTOBER 29, 2018 AT 6:00 PM
BLUE ROOM – TOWN HALL

Meeting Facilitator:  Steven Frazier, Chair
                                Dave Carter, Vice Chair     

Invitees: M. Bird, M. Shanley-Brady, D. Denning, R. Geiger, M. Hintz, N. Kelly, N. O’Dea, C. Perez, D. Pfenninger, M. Ruzbason, T. Sandonato, B. Stratford, and S. Vaill

1.            Roll Call at 6:00 PM

Present: S., Frazier, S. Vaill, M. Brady-Shanley, T. Sandonato, M. Ruzbason, N. O’Dea-Wyrick, D. Carter, N. Kelly, M. Bird, D. Pfenning, B. Stratford, D. Denning, and M. Hintz

2.            Public Comment – None

3.            Business
               Initial planning meeting with Silver, Petrucelli, and Associates

               a.  Introduction - Dean Petrucelli - Project Manager, Bill Silver - Principal

               b.  Opening goal would be August 2020

               c.  Schedule of work was presented to the group for consideration

               d.  Program team needs to be developed. Committee decided that Melony and Nancy will
                    be the educational team to determine the programmatic needs of the building. Building                                principal will also be involved in this meeting along with select staff members.

               e.  Informal conversations will take place with the state grant office routinely throughout the                              process.

               f.  Architects will develop multiple scenarios and present to the team. The team will then have to                     decide on options and move toward a selected scenario.

4.            Scheduling of next meeting November 20, 2018, at 6 PM Blue Room of Town Hall

5.            Adjournment at 7:02 PM 

HINSDALE SCHOOL RENOVATION COMMITTEE MEETING - MINUTES
November 20, 2018, AT 6:00 PM
BLUE ROOM – TOWN HALL

Meeting Facilitator: Steven Frazier, Chair
                               Dave Carter, Vice Chair     

Invitees: M. Bird, M. Shanley-Brady, D. Denning, R. Geiger, M. Hintz, N. Kelly, N. O’Dea, C. Perez, D. Pfenninger, M. Ruzbason, T. Sandonato, B. Stratford, and S. Vaill

1.      Roll Call at M. Bird, M. Shanley-Brady, D. Denning, M. Hintz, Steve Frazier,  N. O’Dea, D. Pfenninger, M. Ruzbason, T. Sandonato, B. Stratford, Steve Frazier, Dave Carter, N. Kelley, D. Denning, and S. Vaill

Order at 6:01 PM

Pledge

2.      Public Comment

John Wiarda - 16 Superior Street Winsted, CT
Chairman of the Energy Commission for Winsted. Look at different energy planning opportunities schools and net-zero refurbishment. Cost is involved. The end product is lower due to energy savings. Flooring that inhibits mold like in a surgery room. Energy efficient lighting, geothermal heating/cooling. Electric charging stations for the vehicle. White Plains New York is adding electric school buses. They are more expensive but save energy. Utility company did provide some of the grant monies.

3.      Business - Audience and committee members encouraged to ask questions throughout the presentation.
       a)       Update from Design Team - Over the last two weeks, met with the superintendent, business office, and principal.
       1)    Update Schedule - Schedule remains on target.
       2)    Meeting minutes & first pass floor plan based on programming meeting/goals.

The floor plan tonight represents base/initial information and can be altered at any point due to function/cost/etc. All physical walls have been verified in the building. All specialty engineers have begun their facility analysis. Tonight, we will hand out preliminary findings. We are not done updating our fact-finding; this process will continue. This is the first reiteration of the floor plan, and certainly not the last. Not proposing significant alterations to the existing structure equals economic savings. They suggested moving the main office to the new main entrance of the building, and elevator access to the second floor (exterior to the building). ADA requires elevator access to all areas of the building to ensure equal accommodations. An elevator is recommended to be outside the building to keep costs in check. Outside elevators tend to be less expensive. No changes to the second floor of the building, structurally or design-wise. Adult offices have been strategically placed to assist with monitoring entrances and exits to the building. Once the estimating happens we can reconfigure the plans to ensure value engineering. Steven Frazier asked if anyone had questions regarding the plans.

Michelle H. - Question - Are all programmatic needs being met in this design. What are we getting extra?

Answer - All current programming is being accommodated in the current proposal. The design does allow for better operation/programmatic design given the layout of the proposal.

Steve F. - Question - What conversations with the state have taken place regarding the overage of square footage?

Answer - The overage of square footage is being investigated by the State and architects will be in communication at our next meeting. They look for the overage to be aligned with programmatic needs. We will work to prepare a statement of justification for space overage.

Audience Member - Question - Going forward there will be options for different design options?

Answer - Yes, as a requirement of the grant office, multiple options will need to be considered including to renovate as new, new construction, and project-based.

      3)    Facility conditions update based on initial architects/engineer’s field visits.

Notes provided by the architecture firm. See document at end of minutes.

      4)    Initial site plan options based on civil engineer’s discussion with town engineer.

Donald Smith presented the civil plan options. New bus drop off entrance in the main entry, a parent pick up and drop off loop would be developed. New play area in front of building for Pre-K and K. Currently play structure would remain in same space but updated. Reviewed the Hinsdale School Culvert and Flooding information (see PDF report from Donald W. Smith, Jr., P.E. Consulting Engineer).

      5)    Next steps. Finalize findings and begin estimate costs.

Comment - Norman Kelly - General concern regarding flooding and mold remediation plan is a requirement of the project, and wanted to ensure that this is non-negotiable in the site plan. Committee agreed with this request and acknowledged that this is a required element.

4.      Adjournment at 8:26 PM

Winsted Hinsdale School Architectural Observations & Recommendations

Provided by Silver, Petrucelli, and Associates on 11/20/2018

Exterior Building Conditions:

Roof: All roofs, on both first and second floor, are older and near the end of their useful lives.  Full replacement is recommended.  Membranes, flashings, insulation and stone ballast should be removed back to the structural deck.  Pitch of roof, drainage calculations and insulation levels will be reviewed designed to meet current codes.

Brick masonry:  Overall, the exterior masonry is in fair to good condition.  There are several areas where patching and replacement of broken masonry units will be needed.  Staining, mildew and minor areas of mold were observed on the exterior.  It is recommended to acid wash the exterior masonry as well as replace all soft joints, control and expansion joints.  The new entrance soffit is in poor condition and should be renovated.

Windows: Overall, the existing windows are in fair to poor condition.  They are 30 years old and with repairs could last another 10 or so.  Some of the frames, operable and fixed, are deteriorated and physically falling apart.  The glazing appears sound, with only minor replacement of failing insulated units.  Caulking around all windows should be removed and replaced.  To achieve security upgrades for the windows the choices are to add a security film or consider replacing the windows for a long-term solution.  It was noted that the character of the gym windows is important to the image and feel of the school.  If considered for replacement, the appearance of those windows would be maintained as closely as possible to the existing.    

Exterior doors:  Some of the exterior doors and frames are deteriorating and require replacement, others may require hardware upgrades and refinishing/painting.  All exterior doors will be reviewed for accessibility, with no steps or approach problems.

Interior Building Conditions:

Floors and ceilings: The existing ceiling tiles are sagging significantly due to moisture and/or humidity within the building and should be replaced.  There may be areas which can be reused on a room by room basis.  Upgrades to ceilings at both former and new lobbies are being considered.  This will also help accommodate above ceiling utility work.  Floors are in fair to poor condition.  Some flooring is deteriorating and needs to be replaced, other areas could be replaced to help brighten up the spaces.  The wood floor in the gym is in need of repair and refinishing.  Due to moisture/humidity concerns, it is recommended to replace the floor with a synthetic, poured sports floor.

Painting:  The interior of the building should be considered for a full repainting to freshen the spaces.

Casework:  The existing casework is generally in poor condition with significant damage.  Much of the existing casework does not meet current accessibility standards.  It is recommended to replace, rather than try to reuse or repair the existing casework.

Interior doors:  The doors are in fair to poor condition.  Some of the doors, exact quantity to be determined, can continue to be used with upgrades to hardware.  The large movable partition separating the gym and cafeteria needs to be replaced.  A new motorized partition has been requested.

Accessibility Upgrades:  Elevator, etc:  Should essential programs be located on the second floor of the building, it would require elevator access.  An elevator could be added to the interior or exterior of the building, depending on the best practical location for the school.  The stage lift will be reviewed for repair or upgrade if required.  Several of the interior doors do not have code compliant access space or approach on the push or pull sides.  Reconfiguration of walls or adding automatic openers where required would be recommended.  The nurse’s toilet room is not accessible, requiring a full redesign.  The kitchen workspaces and equipment will require a full accessibility assessment.

Moisture concerns:  The building has experienced past moisture related and flooding problems due to the culverted stream under the building.  These conditions will be reviewed further by the design team in coordination with the civil engineer.  Options will be formulated to mitigate or reduce the likelihood of future problems.

Addition of K/pre-K toilet rooms:  One of the program additions to the existing floor plan is dedicated and or shared toilet rooms for the K and pre-K rooms.

Winchester Hinsdale School Electrical observations                                                       11/9/18

• Classroom PA system needs to be replaced. In the classrooms, the existing equipment was damaged or was missing completely. The clock/speaker units appear to be in good shape and the Simplex Time Control Center panel is located in the Main Office.
• Toilet Room Call for Aid systems will need to be installed in single toilet rooms. Only two toilet rooms currently have a system and both toilet rooms were missing the corridor light/buzzer units.
• Occupancy sensors will need to be installed in the classrooms in the old portion of the school. The new classrooms have occupancy sensors already.
• Daylight harvesting controls for all classrooms will be required. Currently, the row of lights closest to the windows is on a separate switch from the other two rows.
• Electrical panel infrastructure will need to be upgraded. With the exception of the Kitchen panel, the panels throughout the building are in fair condition at best and should be replaced with new. There are two panels that are old and in poor condition with one panel having exposed lugs. The main 600A building switch located in the Basement Boiler Room should be replaced. Only one utility meter was observed. It is assumed that the distribution panels in the new addition are fed from the equipment in the Boiler Room.
• Fire Alarm system is a combination of a zoned and an addressable system. The systems are also by two separate manufacturers (Simplex (zoned) and FireLites (addressable)). Areas of the school are lacking protection and there are corridors that are non-compliant with horn/strobe coverage being within 15 from the end of the corridor. Classrooms and Toilet Rooms do not have notification devices. The existing control panels are located in the Vestibule by the Gymnasium. If the new main entrance for the school is going to be the Vestibule in the 1988 addition, the control panels should be relocated to that location.  All wiring will need to be extended or replaced with new from the new location.
• Exterior site lighting is sparse. There are pole mounted light fixtures at the 1988 Vestibule entrance and in the East parking area that only serve that area. The fixtures have been retrofit with replacement corncob LED lamps that are not specifically designed for the performance of the fixtures. The Vestibule entries have inefficient recessed PAR lamp downlights that illuminate the area in front of the doors and there is no building mounted lighting in those areas that illuminate the sidewalk or driveway areas. One large HID floodlight is mounted at the top corner of the existing building and lights the parking area between the two sections. There are HID wallpacks that light the areas by the Gymnasium and the back of the Kitchen area. There is no building lighting anywhere else on the building. Emergency egress lighting was not observed at any of the exterior exit doors.
• Interior emergency lighting will need to be replaced throughout. The battery operated ceiling mounted units are old and inefficient and the batteries could most likely have reached the end of useful life. Numerous units were damaged and were hanging from the ceilings. The units were not tested to see if they were operational.
• Existing interior lighting was mostly T8 fluorescent lamps in recessed fixtures; 2x4, 3 lamp fixtures in the Offices and Media, 1x4, 2 lamp pendant mounted wraparound fixtures in the classrooms and 1x4, 2 lamp recessed fixtures along the walls in the corridors. It is our understanding that the interior lighting will be replaced completely by the utility company with more energy efficient LED light fixtures and should not be considered as part of this report.

Winsted Hinsdale Plumbing Observations & Recommendations

Basement Boiler Room: Due to damp conditions in the boiler room, corrosion is visible on metallic piping and equipment.  Basement boiler room finish floor is in an area prone to flooding due to its elevation in comparison to a large storm culvert located under the building.  It is recommended to locate all equipment above the anticipated flood level elevation.  A sump pump in the basement boiler room was not observed operating but should be replaced based on visible condition.

Domestic Water:  A 3” domestic water service with pressure reducing valve is provided and is adequately sized to handle the building’s water demands.  Main shut off valves should be cycled to determine proper operation.  Backflow preventers, which protect against cross contamination between the municipal water system and the building’s devices, have been provided on all required equipment (boilers, kitchen equipment, etc.), additionally on Water Heater #1, which technically is not required by code.  Portions of the existing supply piping were likely joined with lead solder based on the age of the building and past renovations.  The water supply should be tested for lead content and if found to be unacceptably high action will be required.  Mandatory flushing of the lines each day may be permitted to reduce levels of lead, but replacement of piping would be more desirable. 

Water heater #1: (in basement boiler room) non-condensing, gas fired, 100-gallon capacity water heater is adequate for the anticipated demand, installed in 2008 and is in fair serviceable condition, currently set to deliver 120 deg F hot water, with a 5-7 year life expectancy.  Hot water recirculation pump and aquastat are in fair operating condition, 3-5 year life expectancy.  System will require a new NSF 61  compliant 1017 Thermostatic Mixing Valve (TMV) . 

Water heater #2:  (in mechanical room) non-condensing, gas fired, 80-gallon capacity, which is adequate for the anticipated demand, installed in 2009 and is in good serviceable condition, currently set to deliver 150 deg F hot water, with a 10 year life expectancy.  Hot water recirculation pump is in poor operating condition and was observed leaking, replacement is recommended immediately.  Currently the system is not provided with a thermostatic mixing valve, a new NSF 61 compliant 1017 thermostatic mixing valve is required to prevent the delivery of water capable of scalding the end user.

It is recommended to store hot water at 140 deg F (to avoid the growth of Legionella), then to prevent the delivery of scalding water distribute 120 deg F hot water to all plumbing fixtures via 1017 TMV throughout the building, all handwashing lavatories / sink’s hot water temperature shall be limited to 85 – 110 deg F via 1070 TMV per code.

Plumbing Fixtures: Fixtures in the original building consisting of floor mounted water closets are operational but should be replaced with compliant ADA and low flow/water saving types.   Existing floor mounted urinals shall be replaced with wall hung type with partitions per code.   Fixtures in the addition are comparatively modern consisting of wall hung urinals and water closets.  All urinals and water closets are commercial grade flush valve type.  Some bathrooms are provided with non-ADA compliant wash stations, these should be replaced.  All lavatories shall be provided with ADA compliant insulation on drain and supply lines per code and are required to have provisions to limit hot water delivery temperature between 80 to 110 deg F via 1070 thermostatic mixing valve.  Each classroom is provided with a sink and drinking fountain.

DWV system:  The building is provided with a gravity sanitary system which drains to the municipal sewer system.  All vents terminate to atmosphere accordingly.

Roof drainage:  Primary roof drains are provided on flat roofs and should be regularly cleared of debris as a precaution.  Secondary or emergency roof drainage is provided in some areas but was not apparent in other areas.  Means of secondary roof drainage should be provided to comply with code and to ensure the roof’s structural integrity is intact in the event of excessive ponding or water accumulation caused by primary drain obstructions.  The culvert which has most likely been provided to act as a buffer for the Mad River’s 100-year flood plain level has now become a source of humidity and water / infiltration and has caused basement flooding in the past.  All storm drains in the addition are routed to the municipal storm system via gravity while storm in the original building appears to be routed to the culvert. 

Gas service: A 2 PSI gas service and meter assembly is provided, the current meter is rated at 5,000 CFH while building demand is approximately 6,250 CFH, this is adequately sized after considering load diversity.  It is additionally beneficial to have a 2 PSI service in the event new or additional gas fired equipment will be installed, at which point a new meter assembly rated at a higher capacity maybe required.

Kitchen: Two Automatic Grease Recovery Units (AGRU) have been provided to serve grease producing equipment (3 bay sink & dish washer) per code.  It is recommended to maintain AGRU’s per manufacturer’s requirements.  Point of use thermostatic mixing valves have been provided on all hand washing sinks per code.  All prep sinks spill to floor sinks with air gaps accordingly.  Gas appliances located under the range hood are provided with a remote emergency gas shut off system and automatic chemical fire suppression system.

Winsted Hinsdale Mechanical Observations & Recommendations

Existing

• Steam boiler is serving the original portion of the school
• She rooms are served are served with a combination of unit ventilators with baseboard radiation
• No steam boiler chemical treatment was seen in this boiler room. The school has 2 boiler rooms.
• Boiler room #2 is a hot water boiler that delivers hot water to the combination of unit ventilators with baseboard radiation.
• No boiler water chemical treatment was seen in this boiler room as well.
• The heating in the rooms, that are hot water, are controlled by individual thermostats that are mounted on the wall.
• The roof mounted exhaust fans, as well has the existing fan room fans on the roof, are past their service life and need to be replaced.
• Some toilet rooms do not have transfer air ducts.
• No central Building Management Control System.  Control system is the pneumatic control type. System is old, antiquated and very difficult to get parts and not supported by anyone.

Proposed System

• Remove all the existing mechanical systems in its entirety.
• Provide new Rooftop units that are gas fired with DX cooling and hot gas re-heat, 100% economizer, VFD drives. Hot gas re-heat is used for humidity control.
• Provide shut-off VAV boxes with dedicated controls in all interior spaces.
• Provide fan power VAV boxes with electric re-heat for all rooms that have an outside exposure including the roof.
• Provide dedicated units for the cafeteria areas that will see various usage.
• Provide an Energy Management System (EMS) provides a building owner with the ability to monitor, control, and adjust all HVAC (along with plumbing and electrical if desired) systems from a central location.  An operator workstation consisting of a personal computer and printer can be located  in the building, and this station can be accessed remotely via the internet.  The building owner can set occupancy schedules, adjust set points, and monitor trouble/alarm conditions in an efficient manner with this tool.  Features such as night setback, holiday scheduling and weekend scheduling will be included to allow the system to minimize energy expenditure during unoccupied periods.  An alarm feature will be added which can remotely notify facilities staff of any pre-determined, alarm conditions.

HINSDALE SCHOOL RENOVATION COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES
December 17, 2018, AT 6:00 PM
BLUE ROOM – TOWN HALL

Meeting Facilitator:  Steven Frazier, Chair
                                 Dave Carter, Vice Chair     

Invitees: M. Bird, M. Shanley-Brady, D. Denning, R. Geiger, M. Hintz, N. Kelly, N. O’Dea, C. Perez, D. Pfenninger, M. Ruzbason, T. Sandonato, B. Stratford, and S. Vaill

1.      Roll Call - N. O’Dea-Wyrick, M. Brady-Shanley, S. Frazier, R. Field, D. Pfenninger, R. Geiger, S. Vaill, C. Perez, N. Kelly, D. Carter, B. Stratford, D. Denning

2. Public Comment - C. Perez request that meetings not be held on the Monday’s that BOS meet.

3.      Business
         a)      Floor plan review
         b)      Site plan options/discussions

Donald Smith, Civil Engineer, presented three site plans (copies presented at the meeting)

1.      Option 1 - Limited Build - This option does not increase impervious surfaces on the site.

2.      Option 2 - Limited Build - Relocation of the playground to further into the field, 16 additional parking spaces, a small amount of impervious surface added to the site. Increasing impervious area requires that the additional runoff is mediated. Cannot exceed pre-runoff amount.

3.      Option 3 - Removal of 16,000 sq ft. of the old building. This would open up the stream with a 2:1 slope on the sides with 25 feet of embankment. It would support ten additional parking spaces on the Spencer Street side. Site improvements would be made to remediate flooding to address a choke point. There would also be a need to insert a headwall. Water would not back up onto the site, and it would remove all water issues up to a 100-year flood. An additional section would be added to the other side of the building. The new staircase would remain with an overlook and viewing into the water core. In the new building area, a variance would be needed to fully replace the 16,000 sq. ft. If you build smaller, you may not need the variance. A meeting with the state would need to be had ASAP to determine reimbursement for this particular option. 

With Option 1 or 2, the flood level does not support runoff preventing the site from flooding. Option 3 does prevent the site from flooding. At 1.7 feet, the building will then overflow onto the street area.

Mr. Smith presented a relief culvert option. The choke point that previously caused issues was addressed in 1987.  750’ of 48” pipe would be installed as a relief culvert. A right of way may need to be obtained if it enters other properties. This would be approximately 1.2 million. This does not remove the stream from under the school.

David Carter inquired about why Pearson was not expanded? Candy Perez commented Committee at the BOS level, the viability of Hinsdale of a project. Candy Perez, Pearson expansion would most certainly increase taxes. Batcheller and Hinsdale were considered due to the financial benefits. Candy Perez, said that elementary schools need work, no major work has been done since the 1980’s they need to be updated no matter what building you talk about. David Carter commented back regarding the importance of education for new families.

The reimbursement rate for Winchester is 70% need clarity from the state on how this project would be reimbursed at the state level. Off-sight improvement is not typically approved by the State.  However, the firm would seek approval due to the unique situation of this site.

Options 1 and 2 manage the flood issues, option 3 does remedy the flooding issue. The site will be under water, but the building would not be. Steve Vaill commented that he likes option 3.

Paul then reviewed the floor plan. No room layouts changed, one thing that did change is in renovating the building, the boiler room on the lower level needs to be moved to be moved to rooftop - mechanicals and sprinkler. The basement boiler rooms would be abandoned. No changes have been made from the previous discussion except for moving the mechanicals to the surface and roof. The roof is structurally able to handle the new weight. Solar could also be accommodated in the weight (this is not part of the scope of the job).

Candy is asking to investigate making the gymnasium able to accommodate recreation programming. 

Bruce Stratford - Asked if the roof units provide proper ventilation, extensive dehumidification system would be added, this would be added to the waterproofing efforts, with sensors, Ozone would be also used.

Dean talked about being confident that his firm can mitigate the moisture, and solve all the infiltration issues to handle the moisture. On Option 1 and 2 we can keep this building within an acceptable level, we cannot keep the site dry in a 100-year event.

To keep the building dry, fill the masonry opening, doorways would be installed with floodgates. Doors would have gaskets.

         c)      Facility conditions update based on architects/engineer’s field visits.

         d)      The opinion of probable construction cost

Paul presented the financials for Option 1 and 2 - The costs are broken down by construction division. There is a subtotal for costs and then an amount that would be reimbursable by the state. 12% contingency is added. Totaling 10,287,200 and the reimbursable amount would be $3,796,000. The state tells you the final reimbursement value at the end of the project during the final audit (usually 2-3 years following student entrance to the building/completion). Dean recommended a meeting with the state with an option to investigate further.

Option 3 would cost $21 million including a 16,000 sq ft addition and renovation of the remaining facility. We would need to investigate a reimbursement rate with the state.

         e)      Schedule/Next steps.

Motion made by Steve Carter to investigate option 3 for a preparation meeting. 2nd by Steve Vail. Discussion by Doug Pfenninger clarity regarding floodgates, they simply get pulled up, and the outside sight would need cleaning, but the building would remain dry. Remaining moisture issue from the tunnel does that eliminate moisture in option 1 or 2. We are confident they can address any moisture issues.

Bruce asked about how mold is developed; the goal is to remove the moisture that causes the mold. All the mechanicals will assist with having a mold-free building. Bruce asked about previous works completed, and Dean said this is a common practice for their firm to address issues.

Going to the state is for an investigation, not the final process.

Vote: 5-0

Next meeting will be scheduled following the meeting with the state.

Follow Up Public Comment

Melissa Asselin - 228 Smith Hill Road - 2011 Torrington Area Health sighted the berm around the property has mold. Concern regarding the placement of the playground. All of the berms around the building would be removed in the planning process per Dean.

Rob Asselin - 228 Smith Hill Road - Electric Bill has anyone estimated the amount. Dean responded with that equipment cost will be estimated once the particular equipment is selected. Electrical expenses are likely to go up due to the fact you are adding AC, air exchange, etc. Gas would be selected for rooftop units. Other efficiencies will be added to improve costs (insulation, mechanicals).

4.       Adjournment - Motion to adjourn at 7:24 PM.

HINSDALE SCHOOL RENOVATION COMMITTEE MEETING - Minutes
JANUARY 28, 2019, AT 6:00 PM
BLUE ROOM – TOWN HALL
Meeting Facilitator:  Steven Frazier, Chair
                                Dave Carter, Vice Chair     

Invitees: M. Bird, M. Shanley-Brady, D. Denning, R. Geiger, M. Hintz, N. Kelly, N. O’Dea, C. Perez, D. Pfenninger, M. Ruzbason, T. Sandonato, B. Stratford, and S. Vaill

6:00 PM

1.   Roll Call – M. Brady-Shanley, C. Perez, D. Carter, D. Denning, D. Pfenninger, R. Geiger, S. Vaill, T. Sandonato, M. Ruzbason, M. Bird, M. Hintz, B. Stratford

2.   Pledge of Allegiance

3.   Public Comment

John Wilarda - Winsted, CT - Drainage under Hinsdale, has it been checked that it is clear or backed up. SV responded that there are no obstructions in the tunnel.

Candy Perez - Comments are mentioned to me often. Reminder, thank you to the committee. The BOS and BOE formed this committee to look into the issues; this takes time and investigation. Our elementary schools have not had work done in a very long time. Whichever way we go, we do need to do some work on an elementary school. We learn more each time we meet, and we will continue the investigation process. There will be community meetings, and all meetings are open to the public. Winsted is in a better place now. Schools drive economics and home values. The town has been making purposeful efforts to improve our finances to address the infrastructure.

4.    Business – Update from Design Team

a)    Recap of our last meeting - Reviewed the minutes and conversations from the previous meeting. Highlighted the information regarding taking down the part of the building down over the river. On 1/23/19 team met with the state. The town was interested in the reimbursement rate.

b)    Update on meeting with the State of CT, School Construction grants on 1/23/19

The meeting was held on 1/23/19 the state looked at a district holistically. Two concepts were shared - keeping the building as is or taking down the part over the river. The state favored taking down a portion of the building that is over the river. This will once and for all solve the issue of the river. They would penalize us if we didn't take the old building down (2 story building) by giving us a lower reimbursement rate. The state favored this solution from a financial, programmatic, and corrective measure. This direction was strongly encouraged. David Carter further explained the reasoning - The head the grant office is very familiar with Winsted. He was insistent on doing this project correctly.  

c)    Space Standards discussion (including directive from the State)

Every year around June, the state establishes a reimbursement rate - the rate is currently at 70.+%. The other part of the calculation is population - space standards calculation. There is always wiggle room in the space standards calculation.

The district has provided the current and future enrollment projections - we are allowed to look at eight years. We are allowed to use the highest enrollment number within the eight years. The district provided them with five years; we will be providing them with the additional three years. The current number is 269, as the highest five-year projection.  The max square footage is 33,625 for the building. You do get charged if you go over the allowed square footage. However with an existing building, there is another calculation, you actually get an additional 25% allowance since the building was built before 1950.

The question was asked about reimbursing on the current square footage Answer - The state we will not reimburse beyond the allowable square footage without a change to the reimbursement rate.

If we take a portion down, would you entertain rebuilding it and maximizing the reimbursement. The state said they will give a 10% space standard allotment. They are saying if you don’t solve the river issue, we will not finance that square footage. They will pay for the demo of the building and reconstruction at the full 70%. See the chart for detailed information titled square footage allowance.

If we do not proceed with taking the building down, the reimbursement rate will drop to 48%.

You can apply in June and have a referendum after the grant application is submitted.

Michelle Hintz - Is the state not recommending building a K-6? David Carter - Responded no, the state sees this as a better option.

Tony Sandonato - What does a post-June referendum do to the schedule? If the district filed in June, we would not have funding until after a referendum passes so it would likely be December or January. 

Next space standard looks at taking the give back, and the old area down - 33625 allowable, 36988 sq footage with 10% bonus area. The downside of this is we lose square footage, and will need to make programmatic space changes. This keeps the reimbursement rate at 70%. The new addition would be 4400 sq ft.

d)    Floor plan impact & initial concepts

Doug Pfenninger - What is in the original two-story section? Answer - 4 classrooms, stairs, two bathrooms, gym/cafe, four classrooms, state, toilets, kitchen.

Stairs on Hinsdale would stay.

The new addition would have a multipurpose room, kitchen, and two classrooms (this is only a suggestion). You can always build beyond the allowable square footage, but the reimbursement goes down.

Jay Markwell - Are you able to build up? The current building is all on grade, building on top is always feasible, we need an elevator, two stairs. It would add 350K for just circulation, restructure the load, the building is so small it doesn't lend itself well to a second story. The new addition does not require us to seek any variances from planning and zoning. From an economic standpoint, and practicality of keeping young children at grade. It comes down to the cost and if you want the additional fees.

How many square feet would a multipurpose space need to be to house the entire school - approximately 3000 sqft

e)    Updated estimates based on the above information

Keeping the building as it is currently 50000 square foot model - the cost would be $9,217,245 to the town with a 48.3% reimbursement rate.

Tear Down Model - 36,000 square foot model, cost to the Town $7,792,854 with a 70% reimbursement rate

Melissa Asselin - Clarified about the total cost, are all costs of the site work included in this. Dean Petrucelli responded - yes, everything is included

Renovating Batcheller - The state did not like the idea of Batcheller.

Rob Asselin - Is the kitchen being taken down? Response - from Dean Petrucelli, The kitchen will be installed in the new section. 

f)    Next steps

Michelle Hintz made a motion to investigate programming and design in the new addition. Tony Sandonato, 2nd. 7-0

5.  Approve Invoices 

1. Invoice # 19-34 (1/1/2019) - Motion by David Carter, Second by Steve Vaill - 7-0
2. Invoice #18-2550 (12/1/2019) - Motion by David Carter, Second by Steve Vaill - 7-0

6.  Next Meeting Date - February 13, 2019, at 6 PM Blue Room

Adjournment at 7:31 PM

HINSDALE SCHOOL RENOVATION COMMITTEE MEETING – MINUTES
Wednesday, February 13, 2019, AT 6:00 PM
BLUE ROOM – TOWN HALL

Meeting Facilitator:  Steven Frazier, Chair
                                 Dave Carter, Vice Chair     

Invitees: M. Bird, M. Shanley-Brady, D. Denning, R. Geiger, M. Hintz, N. Kelly, N. O’Dea, C. Perez, D. Pfenninger, M. Ruzbason, T. Sandonato, B. Stratford, and S. Vaill

1.         Roll Call - D. Denning, S. Frazier, M. Brady-Shanley, M. Hintz, D. Carter, N. O’Dea-Wyrick, D. Carter - 7:00 PM

2.         Pledge

3.         Public Comment - No public comment

4.         Business – Update from Design Team - Projected enrollment for the next five years was reviewed. Aligned the number of students with the square footage allowance, equaling 36,988. We are allowed an additional 1,000 square foot due to the building being older. The addition can be 4,400 square foot according to the current enrollment. Since the last meeting, SP and A worked with the instructional team to redo the floor plan. Program goal was to get it to fit within the allowable 37,000 square foot. 

         a)          Revised floor plan review

Dean Petrucelli reviewed the potential floor plan. See attachment of “Revised Scheme 3”. Based on 269 enrollment and Pre-K 3 to Grade 2.

BG - Asked if you could potentially seek additional classroom space. SP and A said absolutely

DF - Does this solve the water problem? - Yes, it will solve the issue. 100-year flood flows off-site.

MH - Size of school kitchen is 10% larger than previous.

SV - Is there a generator scheduled to go in. Currently, none in the plan but the DAS will support a new generator at 70% reimbursement.

DC - Solar? Eversource for solar? Dean Petrucelli - It would be a cost prohibitive to the project. The current building has not been analyzed to see if the current structure could handle the additional weight of solar.

Dean Petrucelli then presented the eight-year enrollment forecast required by the state. Maximum enrollment potential is what the state looks at. MBS explained how we arrived at the numbers. Maximizing Pre-K enrollment and averaging 80 Kindergartener.

The increase to the enrollment of 293 allows for a 40,000 sq. foot building.

BG - Talked about regionalization. Old models will be forced to change.

DP - When you file for the grant before June 30th, the grant funding amount will be funded at 70%. The number will reset on July 1. Reimbursement rates say relatively similar year to year.

MH - Wants to investigate the additional square footage.

         b)          Revised site plan review

Don Smith presented the site plan. See “site plan 2 13 2019.” Currently, no planning and zoning variance needed.  If the building would be larger, the variance would be needed. 58 parking spaces on the site. Parent loop would remain with 23 spaces. 4 discharge spaces for student exit. A 5 bus loading area. 2 new playgrounds. Stormwater management on the sides of the field.

For the section of the building coming down. 8 parking spots off of Spencer Dr. Brook would be exposed. Fencing would be installed and guide rail for safety around the brook.

A second pipe would be added to release the water flowing under the driveway

SF - This plan takes care of water and mold issues in the building. All water issues will be resolved. All new ductwork throughout the building. Therefore all issues mitigated.

JB - Is it less expensive to go out or up. Up is a lot more expensive. DP would suggest staying on one story even if it means seeking a variance.

SF - Asked do you need a motion to investigate for the additional 3,000 sq ft.

Michelle Hintz - Made the motion

Dale Denning - 2nd.

4 - Yes

0 - No

1 - Abstain

Motion Passes

         c)           Revised Opinion of probable construction cost review

DP reviewed the scope of cost with the team. With the addition of the building 4,400 sq. foot. Total construction cost $14,149,400. Cost to the town - $8,842,448

If you do the addition based on increased enrollment, it would be about $9.3.

         d)      Schedule/Next steps.     

                        February 25 at 6 PM Blue Room

5.         Adjournment - 7:11 PM Dave Carter Motion, Michelle Hintz 2nd

Winchester Board Education
Type of Meeting: Curriculum Committee Meeting Minutes
Date: Tuesday, September 25, 2018
Location: Town Hall, Blue Room

Committee Members: Nora Mocarski, Alexandria Propfe, and Jamie Duffy, Melony Brady-Shanley, Superintendent of Schools, Barbara Silverio, Principal, Rosanne Field, Principal, Seamus Cullinan, Director of Student Services

Call to Order - 6:35 pm

Roll Call:

Committee Members in Attendance: Nora Mocarski, Alexandra Propfe, Rosanne Field, Barb Silverio, Melony Brady-Shanley, Seamus Cullinan

Committee Members Not in Attendance: Jamie Duffy (unexcused)

Also in Attendance: Christine Royer, Ruthann Horvay        

Meeting Facilitator: Nora Mocarski

1. Open Issues
   1. Informational: Discussion on how the Little Owls Program, School Readiness, and Head Start programs all work together.
      1. Ruth-Ann Horvay discussed the collaboration in place and on how preschool is doing.
      2. History of the program was discussed. Highlights: Initial start was in 1996 FRC came into our district. Seven components. Approached by the state to qualify for school readiness money. Collaborated with Torrington, Ed Connection. Only providing for a full day, full spaces. YMCA pulled out, and 15 spaces went to Winsted Area Child Care.  We received Discovery money for providing preschool experiences. The collaboration started with this grant.
      3. This past year: Discovery Grant led to community plans to provide equity for children. Half-day program for at-risk & three full-day programs.
      4. The 3, full-day programs have not impacted this community as had initially worried.

a)      We guide parents to a  program that best fits child

b)      Ed Advance has waived their fee to full-time program

c)      School readiness liaison = Ruth reports to the state on meeting the components of the grant.

1. 1. 5. Friday’s meeting discussed prescreening. Varying degrees of support in integrating this program. Ruth wants to solidify the process, so all are operating with the same information.

a)      BOE Question: Is there sharing of curricula with all pre-school programs? Answer: We cannot prescribe for other programs. They are required to meet their accreditation requirements. Head Start has federal guidelines to follow. On the other hand, they have been very receptive to ideas.

1. 1. 6. BOE Question: Are these programs tracking progress? At Kindergarten registration time, we look at screening. We found our half-day program students were coming less prepared.

a)      We must be careful and be sure to measure growth, not necessarily achievement. Must look at baseline information. We now have 3 and 4 years in programming. We are getting kids enrolled earlier. Peer models are critical.

1. 1. 7. Current partnership - Melony and Ruth meet every two weeks. Meet with Ed Advance - very open meetings.

a)      Transportation is an issue. Creating a little inequity. Meeting with community members to troubleshoot.

(1)   Jodi and Mel agreed to transport Little Owls. The option was offered. About 12-15 families use free transportation (without IEPs). Some parents are resistant to putting their child into a five day, a full-day program in school readiness program at Batcheller.

(2)   Ed Advance and Winsted Area Childcare might be feeling the pain that Little Owls can offer transportation.

(3)   Families that didn’t switch are not unhappy. It is parent choice. Obligated in offering parents options.

(4)   Consider a shorter day to get more in...see success and then eventually send more a more time.

(5)   Little Owls Program is full at the moment. There is a waitlist.

(6)   School readiness requires classrooms have a % of special needs equal to % IEP kids in the district.

(7)   50% have to be a full day, full year (12 months) who go to Winsted Area Child Care for us to keep the 275K 8:30-3pm ish = full day.

(8)   Parent as Teachers Program as the feeder to the Little Owls program.

1. 1. 8. Soups on” Pre-K families 23-24 families were there today. The purpose is to have students and parents socialize/network. Reading was the focus. One hour. Every month. Teachers were present, the social worker, coaches, and Chicken noodle soup was served.

(1)   Brainstormed “Soup Kits” for next Soups-on event.

(2)   School-based health program has been helpful - can get appointment and appointments are in the same building.

2. Adjourn, 7:13 pm
   1. MOTION: First: Alexander Propfe. - Second: Chris Royer

Winchester Board Education
Type of Meeting: Curriculum Committee Meeting - Minutes
Date: Tuesday, October 30, 2018, 6:30 pm.
Location: Town Hall, Blue Room

Meeting Facilitator: Nora Mocarski

Invitees: Melony Brady-Shanley, Douglas Pfenninger, Alexandra Propfe, Christine Royer, Nancy O’Dea Wyrick, Barb Silverio, Rosanne Field, Seamus Cullinan

Quorum - Curriculum Committee - Quorum needed: 3.

1. Call to Order – 6:30 PM
    
2. Roll Call – A. Propfe, K. Peterson, D. Dutton, S. Cullinan, N. Mocarski, D. Pfenninger, C. Royer, R. Field, R. Manzer, M. Brady-Shanley
    
3. Open Issues
   a)  Presentation - Year 2 Science Roll Out
   1. Rachael provided a detailed explanation of NGSS roll out. NGSS State Assessment – This year will be our baseline year. Equal weight will be given in science like math and reading. An NGSS Overview was provided to the committee, 3D Assessment and Design was provided as a reference for the team. Cross-Cutting Concepts are expected across all content areas. Application of concepts is the goal, no longer memorizing facts. How science is taught is the biggest shift with NGSS. You should see more critical thinking skills, solving real-world problems, etc. Science planning will take a long-term plan not a short-term plan. Our plan will build the capacity of teacher leaders. Professional learning will be targeted. There is no current publication that has adequate NGSS curriculum.
       
   2. Presented the 6 Pillars in design the transition plan. All the pillars leading to the 3-D Implementation Plan.
       
4. 3. Presented the Overview of the NGSS Transition Plan. Entire Administration Team attended the NGSS Overview Training. Attended Transition Planning workshops – Teams of teachers and administrators attended. The Transition Plan has had teacher input. Attended the 3D Assessment Workshop. Participated in the CONCEPT Grant and taught them how to write curriculum. We are nearly almost 100% of staff being inquiry trained. NGX standards training were attended to help teachers understand the new methodology of teaching. This year (2^nd year), training continues, specialized PD is being offered for curriculum writing. NGSX2 focused on classroom application. Rachael and Dave will be trained in chemical hygiene next week.
       
5. 4. Reviewed the NGSS Curriculum Template. Crosscutting Concepts and connections are highlighted across multiple subject areas. Unit Storylines are the different lessons that need to be introduced. All storylines have a question that needs to be addressed. All units have a keystone text (reading always involved). Differentiated is purposefully integrated into the unit plan.
       
6. 5.  All grade levels are required to teach science at least 4x per week.

b) Report out on October 5 PD - How did it go? Cover during BOE Meeting

4. Future collaborative plans with Gilbert?
   c)  Walkthroughs including BOE? November 29, 2018, 8 AM -1 PM
   d)  First impressions on SRBI Data – Next Curriculum Committee Agenda
    
5. Adjourn at 7:20 PM

Winchester Board Education
Type of Meeting: Curriculum Committee Meeting - Minutes
Date: Thursday, January 31, 2019, @ 6:30 pm
Location: Town Hall, Blue Room

Facilitator: N. Mocarski

Invitees: Melony Brady-Shanley, Douglas Pfenninger, Alexandra Propfe, Christine Royer, Nancy O’Dea Wyrick, Barb Silverio, Rosanne Field, Seamus Cullinan.

Quorum - Curriculum Committee - Quorum needed: 3. Reached.
 

1. Call to Order @ 6:30pm
    
2. Roll Call - Melony Brady-Shanley, Douglas Pfenninger, Alexandra Propfe, Nora Mocarski, Barb Silverio, Rosanne Field, Dr. Richard Dutton.
    
3. Open Issues
   1. Update on ESSA since Devos has been in office.
      1. The full ESSA Plan was presented as. 200+ pages. We were welcomed to read.
      2. Summary of ESSA Plan (19 pages) was presented and discussed - No Child Left Behind “Take two” = ESSA.

             a)     National ESSA Plan, state ESSA plan, and then local. Each state has to test and have                                 “must meet” targets

             b)    Testing is at the core. How are students progressing towards / projecting to be proficient on                         SAT? Are students on the right track?

             c)    High schools use SAT and they no longer use SBAC and CAPT

             d)    Elementary school uses SBAC

3. 1. 3. Accountability piece - developed by each state. If off-track, districts need to develop a plan to get on track.

              a)   Multiple measures: District Performance Index. SIP = School Improvement Plan: school  performance, or in-district: DIP - District Improvement Plan

              b)      Feb. 22, 2019 - Deadline. We had to update ESSA scores for the district.

3. 1. 4. School Choice & Alternative Education inside ESSA includes the following (but not limited to):

              a)      Allowing for Mastery-based learning for CT

              b)      HS in CT 25 credits beginning with current 8th into 9th graders

              c)       College-ready curriculum

              d)      Charter schools - can apply for federal funds

              e)      Title I

              f)       Waivers as a state. Can be at the district level

3. 1. 5. Winchester is waiting on results on state tests - 3rd year for ESSA. Results come via email

              a)      We are slightly below - 64.1 last year.

              b)      Moved up from Category 4 to Category 3 (this is good).

              c)      We can compare to other districts via DRG

3. 2. Updates presented on the performance of December assessments
      1. Dibels & NWEA assessment progress

              a)     Principal Field and Principal Silverio shared updates [handout] for Batcheller and Pearson respectfully. Handouts provided that showed student performance levels at each school by grade for NWEA, PELI & Dibels, Running Records, Bridges Math.

              b)      Expecting spring performance to be higher than current performance.

3. 3. Discussion of Hinsdale design and school instructional programs
      1. Floor plan ideas shared.
   4.  1^st year employee conversation
      1. Superintendent shared new staff feedback from 1:1 meetings on the level of support received as new members to the district [Handout]
      2. Melony recorded their comments without commentary. Questions were: “On a scale of 1-10, what is your experience at WPS like?” “Do you feel supported?” “What is going well?” “What needs to be improved?” “What would you like me to know?”

a)       Teachers reported they feel supported in the district. On a scale of 1-10, an average report from new staff was 8.1

IV.          Adjourn @ 7:46 pm

MOTION: A. Propfe, Second: D. Pfenninger → U.

Finance Committee Meeting Minutes
September 25, 2018
Town Hall, Blue Room

Committee Members: Michelle Hintz, Nora Mocarski (Secretary), Cheryl Heffernan, Doug Pfenninger (Chair), Jamie Duffy, Melony Brady-Shanley, Superintendent of Schools, Nancy O’Dea-Wyrick, Director of Finance, Seamus Cullinan, Director of Student Services.

Call to Order: 8:00 pm

Roll Call:

Committee Members in Attendance: Michelle Hintz, Nora Mocarski, Cheryl Heffernan, Melony Brady-Shanley, Seamus Cullinan

Committee Members Not in Attendance: Jamie Duffy (unexcused), Doug Pfenninger, Chair (excused), Nancy O’Dea-Wyrick (excused)

Also in attendance: Christine Royer, Barb Silverio, Rosanne Field, and Richard Dutton

Agenda:

            Motion: Approval of agenda: First: Cheryl Heffernan, Second: Michelle Hintz

Tuition - out of town.

1. 1. At this time, we are not accepting requests for out of district tuition students. But this will be revisited at a later time.

1% fund - Clarification of what we are doing with this money [handout]:

1. 2. $155,025 left over at the beginning of the FY2018 to put into the non-lapsing fund.
      1. The BOS approved for the BOE to use this non-lapsing fund ($155,025).
         1. To be used for TBD.

Alliance Building Grant to Alliance School Districts to clarify what it was spent on:

1. 3. Grant came from Administrative Services, not from the Department of Education
   4. Given to schools for construction not covered under town funds
      1. $338,000 was given to the BOE for repairs that don’t typically get covered by local funds. If this grant were available, repairs would have had to come out of local funds. These items include 11 to 12 things (ex. staircases, chimneys)
      2. We used 95% of grant at Pearson
         1. Examples include replacing broken sinks in the bathrooms, hairdryers, handles, faucets, resurfaced the parking lot, created a walkway, replaced a 31-year-old walk-in cooler, exterior gym doors, exterior receiving entries at loading docks, dishwasher...
      3. Used 5% to Hinsdale steps.
         1. We were approved to use the 5% to repair/replace steps at Hinsdale
         2. All the work had to be invoiced by Oct. 31st, and we are on target to be invoiced by October 31st.
2. Motion to adjourn at 8:24 - First: Cheryl Heffernan, Second: Michelle Hintz.

Winchester Board of Education
Type of Meeting: Finance Committee Meeting - Minutes
Location:  Town Hall, 338 Main Street Winsted, CT - Blue Room
Date:  Tuesday, October 30, 2018 @ 8:00 p.m.

Meeting Facilitator: Melony Brady-Shanley, Superintendent, Nancy O’Dea-Wyrick, Director of Finance

Invitees: Michelle Hintz, Nora Mocarski, Doug Pfenninger, and Cheryl Heffernan.

1. Call to order
    
2. Roll call – Hintz, Peterson, Mocarski, Heffernan, Pfenninger, O’Dea-Wyrick, Cullinan, Field, Silverio
    
3. Approval of Agenda
    
4. New business
   1. Year to date budget update – Will send to Doug and Kristin
   2. Anticipated expense changes for special education – Budget is even and holding steady.
   3. Anticipated facilities projects – Rocks removed from playground need to be moved, Finishing the Alliance Projects at Pearson (Gym Doors and Freezer), Batcheller School – Two trees need to be removed. Discussion of traffic backup at Batcheller School.
       
5. Teacher Negotiations update – Ratification next week.

Adjourn at 8:45 PM

Winchester Board of Education
Type of Meeting: Finance Committee Meeting Minutes
Location:  Town Hall 338 Main Street Winsted, CT - Blue Room
Date:  Tuesday, December 18, 2018 @ 6:15 p.m.

Meeting Facilitator: Melony Brady-Shanley, Superintendent
                                    Nancy O’Dea-Wyrick, Director of Finance

Invitees: Michelle Hintz, Nora Mocarski, Doug Pfenninger, Kristen Peterson, Shana DeVoux, Chris Royer, Richard Dutton, Alexia Propfe, and Cheryl Heffernan.

Call to order - 6:14 pm.

I.             Roll call: N. Mocarski, B. Silverio, R. Field, C. Heffernan, D. Pfenninger, M. Brady-Shanley, S. Cullinan, M. Hintz, N. O’Dea-Wyrick.

II.            Approval of Agenda
               MOTION: First: Cheryl, Second: Michelle Hintz - U

III.           New business

               a)  The fiscal Year 2019 Timelines shared and discussed

               b)  Update on Negotiations ongoing.
                    Next Gilbert Negotiation meeting: January 14, 2019

               c)  Open Discussion - See website on “Hinsdale Renovation.”

Hinsdale Renovation Commission - D. Pfenninger to report

• Architects came with three proposals.
• Most basic costs: 10 million
• Discussion at the meeting was looking into Option #3.
• Option #3 To demolish the 16,000 sq. foot, the two-story portion over the river @ approximately 21 million dollar project
• There was a discussion of the reimbursement rate from the State of Connecticut Possible 60% reimbursement for new construction
• See Hinsdale Renovation Webpage for details

IV.           Adjourn
               MOTION: Cheryl motion at 7:02 pm, Second: M. Hintz, → U

Winchester Board of Education
Finance Committee Meeting - Minutes
Location: Town Hall, 338 Main Street, Winsted, CT - Blue Room
Date: January 31, 2019

Meeting Facilitator: M. Brady-Shanley, Superintendent, and N O’Dea-Wyrick, Director of Finance

Invitees: D. Pfenninger, N. O’Dea-Wyrick, M. Brady-Shanley, N. Mocarski, M. Hintz S. DeVoux, C. Heffernan, A. Propfe, and C. Royer, K. Peterson, Dr. R. Dutton

1. Call to Order @ 8:10pm

2. Roll Call - Michelle Hintz, Alex Propfe, Cheryl Heffernan, Dr. Richard Dutton, Douglas Pfenninger, Barbara Silverio, Nancy O’Dea-Wyrick, Rosanne Fields, Melony Brady-Shanley, Nora Mocarski

1. Approval of Agenda
   1. MOTION: First: M. Hintz, Second: C. Heffernan

2. New Business
   1. Gilbert Contract
      1. Discussion of current state of negotiations with Gilbert.
      2. Reminder of Gilbert’s budget presentation meeting on Tuesday, February 5, 2019.
   2. 2020 Budget
      1. Two handouts shared and discussed: 1) “FY2020 Total Anticipated Resources Budget” and 2) “Projected FY2020 Budget - Town Appropriation and Support.” A loss of $1,894,721 will mean (-7.9%) presuming no help with Commissioner’s Network and Alliance Networks

3. Adjourn @ 9:07pm
   1. MOTION: First: M. Hintz, Second: C. Heffernan → U

Winchester Board Education
Type of Meeting: Policy Committee Meeting Minutes
Date: Tuesday, September 25, 2018
Location: Town Hall, Blue Room

Committee Members: BOE Members: Cheryl Heffernan, Michelle Hintz, Alexandria Propfe, Jamie Duffy, and Richard Dutton.

Melony Brady-Shanley, Superintendent of Schools, Nancy O’Dea-Wyrick, Director of Finance, Barbara Silverio, Principal, Rosanne Field, Principal

Call to Order: 7:15 pm

Roll Call:

Committee Members in Attendance: Michelle Hintz, Alexandria Propfe, Richard Dutton, Melony Brady-Shanley, Barb Silverio, Rosanne Field

Committee Members Not in Attendance: Jamie Duffy (unexcused), Nancy O’Dea Wyrick (excused)

Also in attendance: Cheryl Heffernan, Christine Royer, Seamus Cullinan, Nora Mocarski

Meeting Facilitator: Michelle Hintz.

1. Open Issues
   1. Superintendent Melony Brady-Shanley will contact Vin of CABE regarding the research into a bylaw to direct the BOE on social media etiquette/use. To ask CABE to consider “9327.1 Appendix.”
      1.  To discuss consideration for a bylaw (perhaps 9327.1 Appendix) in October.
      2. First read will be at the BOE meeting in November, the second read in December 2018.
   2. Regarding Policy 5114 -
      1. Question regarding the section of due process on Student Expulsion beginning on p. 15.

a)      To change language from “shall” to “may” under P5114(f) and

b)      to take out “mandatory” in the title on the same page.

1. 2. 2. Policy committee to discuss in October. First read for BOE in November, Second read in December 2018.
   3. To redo Packet 3 for October.
2. Adjourn at 8:00. Motion - First: Cheryl Heffernan, Second: Dr. Richard Dutton

Winchester Board of Education
Type of Meeting: Policy Committee Meeting - Minutes
Location:  Town Hall – Blue Room
Date:  October 30, 2018 @ 7:15 p.m.

Meeting Facilitator: Michelle Hintz

Invitees: D. Pfenninger, N. O’Dea-Wyrick,  M. Brady-Shanley, N. Mocarski, S. DeVoux, C. Heffernan, A. Propfe, and C. Royer.

I.          Call to order at 7:26 pm

II.         Roll call

 M. Brady-Shanley, R. Dutton, R. Field, C. Heffernan, M. Hintz, D. Pfenninger, N. O’Dea-Wyrick, N. Mocarski, K. Peterson, A. Propfe, B. Silverio, S. Cullinan. C. Royer

Absent: S. DeVoux, Unexcused.

III.        Approval of minutes from the last meeting

                        MOTION: First: C. Heffernan, Second: N. Mocarski → Unanimous.

IV.       Open issues

          a)            None

V.         New business

          a)            Review policies P5114, P5141.3, P5141.4, and P5144.1

                                    P5114 (a-f) (Suspension and Expulsion/Due Process)

                                                “Shall” must remain “Shall” per state statute.

                                                MOTION to bring P5114 (a-f) to the next BOE meeting

                                                            First: N. Mocarski, Second: C. Heffernan → Unanimous.

          b)            Social Media

                                    Note that 9000 series are automatically part of our Bylaw Section of the BOE

9327.1 (a-d)  and Appendix (Social Media)

NOTE: Items # 13-24 as presented pertain to “...school district activities…”

Leave: # 23 and 24.

NOTE: Will renumber items # 13-24 under 9327.1(c).

NOTE: To add the following in BOLD into 9327.1 (b) “Board members or others, [while listed, not limited to], a personal, social, racial, and/or religious basis.”

NOTE: To adopt the two paragraphs under “OR” in 9327.1(b). The first paragraph starts with “Board members using social networking sites may inadvertently…” and the second paragraph which starts, “Board members will not have online conversations…”

NOTE: To add, “General Social Media Etiquette” to clarify that the Appendix section here is a “guideline” for BOE members.

                   MOTION to bring 9327.1 (a-d) and Appendix to the next BOE meeting 
                             First. C. Heffernan, Second: D. Pfenninger → Unanimous.

                                    Second read of 9000 series and social media will be in December.

          c)      Policy 4000.1 (Sex Discrimination & Sexual Harassment in the Workplace)

                                    Current Title IX policy is from 2001.

MOTION: Move to approve 4000.1 at the next BOE in November with the understanding to check with Shipman and Goodwin to expand the language to include, “sexual orientation - actual or perceived, gender identity, transgender status” in addition to “sex”

                    First: C. Heffernan, Second: D. Pfenninger → Unanimous.     

VI.       Adjournment

                        MOTION: To adjourn at 8:13pm

First: C. Heffernan, Second: D. Pfenninger. → Unanimous.

Winchester Board of Education
Policy Committee Meeting Minutes
Location: Town Hall, 338 Main Street, Winsted, CT - Blue Room
Date: January 31, 2019

Meeting Facilitator: Michelle Hintz

Invitees: D. Pfenninger, N. O’Dea-Wyrick, M. Brady-Shanley, N. Mocarski, S. DeVoux, C. Heffernan, A. Propfe, and C. Royer, M. Hintz

I.             Call to Order at 7:45 pm.

II.            Roll Call - Michelle Hintz, Alex Propfe, Cheryl Heffernan, Dr. Richard Dutton, Douglas Pfenninger, Barbara Silverio, Nancy O’Dea-Wyrick, Rosanne Fields, Melony Brady-Shanley, Nora Mocarski

III.           Approval of previous minutes

A.            MOTION: First: C. Heffernan, Second: M. Brady-Shanley → U

IV.          Open

A.            None

V.            New Business

A.            5141.3 - Students Health and Immunization

a)            Paragraph 5 omit “health assessments” and substitute…” on religious grounds...must request an exemption to the superintendent in writing. The request must be acknowledged by the clerk, CT license, attorney, or school nurse.”

2.            CABE - suggested as 3a) Melony recommended, to follow CABE’s language and attached as specific dosages of immunizations and dates by when immunizations and doctor visits, countries coming from, TDABT, health assessment record, form…

a)            MOTION: First: Dr. Dutton move 5141.3 to first read and include regulations and appendix. Second: C. Heffernan → U

B.            5141.4 - Act Protecting School Children

1.            Reporting of child abuse and sexual assault.

2.            Three different versions of this policy. 5141.4 - policy is short, but regulations are explicit.

a)            Not changeable because it is all statutory.

b)            MOTION: First: Michelle Hintz to move short version of 5141.4 with regulations attached to first read, Second: C. Heffernan → U

C.            5144.1 - Use of Physical Force/Restraint/Seclusion and Time Out.

1.            No choice here on this policy.

2.            Page 2 policy starts and goes to Form 3. Include all (appendix, etc.) but take out “alternate SDE version.”

3.            Do not insert alternate.

a)            MOTION: First: Dr. Dutton to move all but “alternate” in 5144.1 to first read Second: Cheryl Heffernan → U

D.            5144.4 - Time Devoted to PE Classes

1.            Similar to our current policy. We cannot restrict 20 min. recess and cannot remove recess as punishment.

a)            MOTION: First C. Heffernan to move as is 5144.4 to first read. Second: Dr. Dutton → U

VI.          Motion to adjourn at 8:08 pm.

A.            MOTION: M. Hintz, Second: C. Heffernan.