Town of Jackson, NH - Facilities Committee Minutes for August 29, 2007

Recap: Chairman Thompson stated the Whitney Foundation has approached the School Board expressing willingness to locate a 4000 sf building on school property roughly where the Trickey Barn is presently located. If it is a community center that comes to the school district as a stand alone turnkey product, it would give the school something that would also have the option of use as a multi-purpose room. Mr. Thompson noted this is what has the Board rethinking this Committee’s work at this late date - one of the biggest items of the 2700 sf addition included a multi-purpose room, we have an undersized lot, he does not get the sense we have room for both things. Mr. Thompson noted the School Board Chairman feels we can revisit anything that has been on the table. There was a motion at the June meeting to get estimates to remove the safe in the school and to do a “bump-out” of the office, creating another office. Dr. Nelson pointed out he would need authorization to expend some money for that.

The Chairman polled the Committee members individually as to their thoughts with the following result: Mr. Edgerly said, basically, the plan that we have before us we have been working on with Banwell – the only thing he could see the Betty Whitney building might effect would be the kitchen space and possibly the library space; he does not see that building taking over our purpose.

Mr. Weeder said the Betty Whitney Center has an effect on what we are doing. He noted if the mission is changing he wants to know what the new mission is. He noted the space can be used, he cannot see us removing all the space there because of what the Whitney Center will bring to us. There has been discussion about needed space in the school, and we should continue working on that. Mr. Kelley said the description is 4000 sf building and does not begin to address the needs of the school that we have been charged with developing, other than the possibility of use of the multi-purpose room. He said our total charge is educational needs for the school; secondly, he feels it is a waste of time and money to think about removal of the safe, that we will spend more money putting it back together, and it was his assumption that that had been resolved at the last meeting. Mr. Edgerly said we want to see actual numbers that it is “too cost prohibitive.” Mr. Stevenson agreed the Board should get a cost estimate with regard to removing the vault because previously we have had complaint that there was no enough information provided - we have to have a marketing plan. Mr. Weeder said putting a new space on the school is a cost efficient way of gaining space in remodeling old space. Mr. Stevenson said he thinks we should continue with the proposal because that is what we were charged with; however, there is a lot going on with the Whitney proposal. He feels there has to be a kitchen in the school, and we have to keep an open mind as regards getting rid of the community room.

Ms. McClave questioned if this building goes up on school property, is it School District property? Mr. Thompson felt it is tricky to separate because the building would impact the school. He said the general consensus at the last meeting was that it was going to be on school property, so unless there was a land swap it would be under the control of the school. It was Mr. Dougherty’s opinion that it is clear that if it goes up on school property it is a school building and a school responsibility - legally the school has control of the building, but that is not the intention of the Foundation. Ms. McClave pointed out the “Road to hell is paved with good intentions.”

Mr. Andrews said “If I have something on my property I expect to do all the scheduling for it and control who is in there.” He said he is not comfortable having an administrator changing schedules, the school has to have control. He would be concerned about the space if trying to do the multi-purpose room, and there is the question also of parking, that one problem with what got voted down was where the parking is going to be. He said we are looking for what the School Board is going to officially say on how they want to address it, and what the school administration wants to do with it - will the community center have available in it all the things that the school needs to function?

Ms. Kebler said she feels the process for the school needs has been slowed down as a result of other projects that have been considered, and we may be slowing the process down further. She said it is her understanding that it is felt that that building could facilitate music and indoor play area; also if we are replacing the Trickey Barn with the community center, and the expansion, we are limiting our outdoor play space. She said she agrees with Mr. Kelley that it would be poor use of money to continue to explore removal of the safe. Dr. Nelson said the community center would not meet all of the school needs; such things as speech and occupational therapy should be part of the school building. He said he understands the desire to get a number for the removal of the safe, but it will cost money to get that.

Dr. Nelson questioned what role the school plays in conjunction with the Whitney Center? What role the school plays in supervision and scheduling? What about maintenance and repair costs? He acknowledged there is money set aside for that by the Whitney Foundation, but does not think that would cover all of that. He noted there are still needs for the school that have not been addressed. Ms. Kebler said she agrees that with regard to the school use of the building, there are certain scheduling pieces that have to be maintained weekly.

Mr. Badger said if we are going to be considering the Whitney Center, we need to start in as quickly as possible addressing what spaces we have that could be in another building. Ms. Kebler said it is her understanding that the feeling is that music and indoor recreation can be held in that community center; it is not clear whether art (and the library) could be held there because there is a lot more set up for art. She said comment has been made by a member of the Whitney Board of Trustees that that program is questionable at this point. She said in discussing it with the art teacher she agrees that having to take down her art program every week would be difficult. Ms. Kebler does not see any of the other spaces as being able to be in the center, such as speech/occupational therapy, or special ed. Mr. Kelley said it was clearly defined that there would have to be a dedicated space for art/music in that center function so that it would not interfere – separate from the community center – a multi-purpose room dedicated for that. It was Mr. Weeder’s feeling that if we gain music space we have accomplished a lot because of the noise.

Mr. Thompson said one question we need answered from the Board is “What is the Whitney Center going to be able to accomplish?” He asked for other questions the Committee needs to have answered in order to not slow down our progress. It was Mr. Badger’s feeling that the Whitney Center people will cooperate, for instance, if the school needs a lock-out space for musical instruments. He stated they are looking to us to give them direction, they want it open to the whole community at various times, as well as school use. He felt the question has to be answered “What can we have in that building?” Mr. Stevenson said “build the building, give the school a key.”

Mr. Edgerly felt as regards the location of the community center and the expansion to the school, we should be looking to not moving back into the play space, noting oversight by the playground supervisor is a concern. Mr. Kelley said we spent 15 months on trying to take a community center and accommodate everything that had to be done and address the school educational needs. Mr. Stevenson said what we are saying is “if you put the Whitney Center there, it will give you the athletic abilities and the music space.”

Mr. Benson said we are talking about taking ownership of a building. In looking at the agreement between the parties it is his sense that the people who will build this building will be the School District. The Whitney Foundation will provide the funding for the school to build that building - the Trust is not set up to physically build the building. Secondly, we need to look at what the proposed community center would get you that you might be already trying to do in the original plans, and what would we have to do at the school site if the community center was built?

Mr. Badger said what was driving this whole thing before was, at the time the Whitney Center was being controlled by development to make it 23’ high for basketball, now there is a different attitude from the Whitney group - lesser seating, etc. – just a community center. He said they are trying to give us a gift of $1 million plus money to maintain the building. His concern is that taxpayers are now going to say we can cut the other plan by half. We need to look at what absolutely has to be tied directly into the school facility.

4. Discussion of Third Option: Mr. Thompson questioned whether the Committee should be looking at a scaled down recommendation to take to the Board, assuming they enter into agreement with the Whitney Foundation. There are two options – looking at something like this with a bathroom and lock out ability, and then a more scaled back version with storage space carved into one of the classrooms. He said the work is done (David Laurin’s plan) and he has asked Mr. Laurin to come here for the Committee’s next meeting on Sept. 18^th. Mr. Badger felt the Committee should be looking at both options.

Ms. Kebler said the only thing she sees that could be cut from the current plan would be the multi-purpose room; the other pieces to this plan cannot be brought to the community center - the school has to have its own kitchen in the building. Mr. Bordash agreed, noting that in the current school the kitchen is visited twice a day by the students and, if we have them running to another building, they would have to be supervised.

Mr. Badger questioned the conference room. Ms. Kebler stated they could potentially accommodate the conference room in the community center, but would need a space for library in the school building. Mr. Badger suggested combining the conference room and the library. The other functions were addressed as follows: Multi-purpose room – yes; Art – they could possibly make it work; Kitchen – they have to have a kitchen in the school building, and well as occupational/speech therapy space and guidance space. The conference room and the library could conceivably be combined at the community center. Mr. Weeder said they should not totally eliminate art space. Mr. Kelley noted it is a small space for art and if they start chopping this up, they are going way back.

Mr. Stevenson commented if all we are moving to the community center is the play area and music room, it would be O.K. He noted concern also for the location of the center, where it is going to go, stating if the barn is coming down we do not have to build right on the exact footprint, if it is adjusted some we would have the area in the back for playground.

Mr. Kelley noted the size of the community center has been reduced by the Foundation down to 250 person seating capacity - they have reduced it even lower so it can be built for $1 million – they have to either find space within the structure or grow it back again. He felt we need to get a little more information back from the School Board as to what they are going to do, and that the Committee should continue doing what it started and maybe we can then better answer what we can take out of this and send over there. It was Mr. Weeder’s opinion that another meeting is needed because the Whitney input will effect how we move ahead.

Ms. Kebler wished to qualify her statement about art space, explaining she has participated in this process for two years, having been asked to think at the level of a minimalist. If thinking about accommodating art in the multi-purpose room she would think of it as a minimalist approach, but it is not the best answer. She said we have a stellar art program where kids work on projects for weeks on end, and in a building that will be used by many it will mean having to move these projects in and out.

Mr. Badger said he sees a problem with adding space, noting we already have a school that is more than double the size of what it was when we had 58 kids 20 years ago; we are now talking about another major increase and he does not think we need all of that space and can reduce it down and get it built within a budget frame that the voters would go for. He stated if we go over $1 million for what we are trying to accomplish for the school, we will have trouble getting it voted through, his feeling being that there are a lot of voters here who do not want to see increases in their taxes. Mr. Kelley said he does not disagree, but we have to make sure we do what is right – it is our last shot. He said he feels even if we do a minimal project to accommodate the minimal educational needs of the school, there are many voters who do not want to see a Whitney Center on that property.

7. Citizen Comments: Mr. Funicella said he agrees with Mr. Badger’s comments because we have to think outside the box – if you bring something to the town in March that is exquisite in its design and price, it would probably fail. He said as regards the gift of the Whitney Center, they made it very plain that the school would have the preeminent position in the daytime and he does not think there would be a problem with the scheduling since in most cases there is no one in the town to use it other than perhaps the Sewing Circle. He suggested also looking at down scaling, noting if you bring a high priced project to the town, along with the Whitney Center, it will not pass – people will be more concerned about the tax rate than when the Sewing Circle is going to use the community center.

Mr. Thompson stated we will see David Laurin here on Sept. 18^th with two separate floor plans and the figures that go with them, and there will be a presentation by Dr. Nelson on the time line. Mr. Badger noted we keep skipping by the grounds and the need to look seriously at that. It was Mr. Kelley’s feeling that once we settle on a plan, then we will question how that will affect the site.