Council Reviews Its Role In Elementary School Building Project.  May Reconsider Net Zero Bylaw.

Report On The Special Town Council Meeting, February 28,2022.

This meeting was conducted over Zoom and was recorded. The recording can be viewed here,.

Present:
Lynn Griesemer (President, District 2), Ellisha Walker, Andy Steinberg, and Mandi Jo Hanneke (at large), Cathy Schoen and Michele Miller (District 1), Pat DeAngelis (District 2), Dorothy Pam and Jennifer Taub (District 3), Pam Rooney and Anika Lopes (District 4), Ana Devlin Gauthier (District 5).  Absent: Shalini Bahl-Milne (District 5)

Staff: Paul Bockelman, Town Manager and Athena O’Keeffe, Clerk of the Council

Griesemer, Devlin Gauthier, Pam, Rooney, Hanneke, and Schoen were present in Town Hall. The others participated remotely.

Elementary School Building Committee (ESBC) members Cathy Schoen (District 1) and Ellisha Walker (at large) presented a report on the status of the planned new 575 student elementary school for grades kindergarten through fifth grade to replace Fort River and Wildwood schools. Because this was a special Town Council meeting, public comment was not taken.

Griesemer outlined the role of the council in the project. The council will vote to place a debt exclusion (property tax override) to pay for the town’s share of the school on a future ballot by end of 2022 or early 2023 for vote occurring In March or April 2023. The debt exclusion must pass by 50%+1 for approval, however the council needs a two-thirds vote (nine councilors) to approve the debt exclusion vote and to authorize borrowing the funds if the measure passes the public vote. She also said that the council must also take another look at the net zero bylaw as it relates to the cost of this project.

The town council does not determine educational and space plans or what is submitted to Massachusetts School Building Association (MSBA). Those are the purview of the Amherst School Committee (SC). Schoen recommended that councilors view the recording of the latest SC meeting with the architects DiNisco Design which details the educational plan and its relation to the space . A draft of the educational program can be found here. There is also a website for the project at www.Amherst-School-Project.com.

The project is currently in the feasibility phase, where several preliminary designs are being developed for both the Fort River and Wildwood sites. Some plans involve renovation with an addition, and some are all new construction. The traffic patterns at each site will be considered as well as the feasibility of geothermal energy and whether the building will have one, two, or three floors. Hopefully, these plans will be completed by the middle of March, so the preferred design can be chosen by June 2022. The design needs to be approved by the MSBA and the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) to make sure it meets the needs of Amherst students and the programs offered.

The new school will have 30 classrooms, five per grade, as well as dual language, English language learners, and special needs programs for grades K through 5. Kindergarten and first grade classes will have 19 students, and higher grades will have 20 students per class. Both sites offer the possibility for the new construction to take place while the original building is still occupied.

If all goes smoothly, construction will take place from 2023-2026 with the building being completed by the spring or fall of 2026.

Councilor Comments
Several councilors expressed concerns about the cost of the project. Pam Rooney (District 4) asked why the town does not learn how much the MSBA will contribute to the cost until late in the planning. Schoen said that many factors go into the state’s contribution. Even though the state encourages net zero designs, it does not pay for photovoltaic panels and only covers excavation costs up to 8% of the total cost of the project, so much of the geothermal energy cost would not be covered. Although these are up front costs, they pay off in the long run, and it is possible to get leasing agreements for solar panels. The MSBA also limits the reimbursement per square foot of space.

Mandi Jo Hanneke (at large) wondered if a three-story building might be less expensive than a two-story building. Walker noted that the soils and wetlands at the Fort River site might not support a three-story building. Hanneke also asked whether the council should look at modifying the net zero bylaw in order to allow more leeway in reining in the cost. In addition, she questioned whether Wildwood and Fort River would be subject to the Demolition Delay Bylaw, since they are 50 years old. Wildwood was built in 1970 and Fort River in 1973. She suggested that the council work on modifying these bylaws now, before the final designs are completed.

Jennifer Taub (District 3) wondered why the 2016 design for the grade 2 through 6, 650 student dual elementary school which failed to pass Town Meeting allocated 164 square feet per student, whereas the current design has 184 to 198 square feet per student. Schoen explained that the 2016 design did not have kindergarten classes which need more space. Also, there are more special needs programs in the new design.

Dorothy Pam (District 3) felt there was not enough space in the proposed design. She said that it is likely we will be dealing with COVID-19 for a long time, so we must allow adequate spacing and ventilation. She also worried about evacuation for fire drills from a three-story building. Schoen noted that some of the schools the ESBC visited had flexible space arrangements with rooms serving more than one purpose which could allow more functionality in the same space.

In response to Hanneke’s question about community use of the gym or cafeteria, Town Manager Paul Bockelman noted that the public has access to multiple gyms at the high school and middle school.

Rooney thought the administrative space might be made smaller, but Michele Miller (District 1) noted that the proposed space is 25% less than the combined space at Fort River and Wildwood. She also wondered if the town could accept gifts or grants to help pay for the school. Finance Director Sean Mangano said that some money could be raised, for instance to help pay for energy systems, but other money may reduce what the town receives from the state.

Walker ended the meeting by expressing her concerns that a large property tax increase could drive families, especially BIPOC families from town. She encouraged the town to set a cost goal that would minimize the tax increase that will be in effect for many years to come. The ESBC expects to hear initial cost estimates at the public forum on March 9.

In the public comment period of the regular Town Council meeting immediately following this special meeting, Rudy Perkins recommended that the town look at other net zero schools. He noted three designs with 170 to 176 sq ft per student, which is lower that the size of the proposed Amherst school. He remarked that a larger school would not only cost more, but would have more impact on climate.

Upcoming Meetings For The School Project

March 4 8:30 AM ESBC
March 8 SC 6;30
March 9: public forum 6:30 where initial cost estimates will be presented
March 11: 8:30 AM ESBC