NOTES OF DECEMBER 27, 2016 RYE BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING

Final Revision B – Provided by the Rye Civic League

 

            Present (clockwise around table):  Town Administrator Michael Magnant, Selectmen Craig Musselman and Priscilla Jenness, Finance Director Cyndi Gillespie.  Not present:  Selectman Joseph Mills.

            Also present and sitting in the audience:  Interim Fire Chief Tom Lambert, Public Works Director Dennis McCarthy, Police Chief Kevin Walsh. 

Persons present from the public included:  Peter Crawford, Alex LaCasse (Portsmouth Herald), Phil Winslow.

Additional persons present from the public for the Library portion only included:  Victor Azzi, Diane Bitter, Steven Borne, Frances Erlebacher, Paul Goldman, Jane Holway, Ray Jarvis, John Loftus, Ann Malpass, Monica McCarthy, James Tegeder, Joe Tucker, Ritchie White, Phil Winslow and numerous others.

 

Editor’s note:  For ease in finding particular sections using the archived video and audio on the Town website, the elapsed time is indicated.  Use the slider and the elapsed time indicated at the bottom of the video window to fast forward to the desired section.  Videos on the Town website may currently be accessed at www.town.rye.nh.us by clicking on “Town Hall Streaming” at the bottom left of the screen. 

Follow the link for “Town Hall Live Streaming,” then find the meeting by date under “Previous.”  The second portion of the meeting was at the Rye Public Library and is a separate video, available by following the link for “Rye Public Library Live Streaming.”  The procedure for finding the video by date is the same.

The Town Hall portion of the video starts at 5:30:59 p.m. (0:00 elapsed).

The Library portion of the video starts at 6:30:50 p.m. (0:00 elapsed).

The elapsed times are relative to the beginnings of the respective videos.

 

Summary

 

1.      The Selectmen refused to provide further details or answer questions about the acquisition of Transfer Station land that the Town already thought it owned for $75,000, citing the pending court case.

2.      The bids for the two Red Mill Ln. culverts were received.  The low bid was $220,000 for each culvert, a total of $440,000 or an estimated $500,000 after engineering costs and contingency.  The warrant article voted earlier this year provided only $150,000.  The Town will augment that with $110,000 in the 2017 operating budget (rather than presented as a separate warrant article) and complete only the first of two culverts.

3.      No agreement has been reached with any of the three town employees unions, whose contracts are expiring.  The sticking point is health care.

4.      The timing of meetings on Town Hall was agreed.  Public meetings are scheduled for January 3, January 9 and January 17.  The cost appearing in any warrant article will need to be decided after hearing public input on January 3 so that the hearing notice can appear in time for the January 17 hearing which would occur on the last possible date. 

5.      Hutter Construction, the sole responding bidder for the Town Hall project, explained its two bids (one for renovation, the other for tear down and rebuild) both for approximately $3 million.  Extensive public input and questions were taken.  Key issues are (a) the long-term suitability of the building in terms of durability and meeting future town space needs; (b) the high $400 to $500 per sq. ft. cost likely once “soft” costs are added; (c) the location of the meeting room in the addition vs. in the Great Hall; (d) the concessions needed with the renovation option relative to the new build option; and (e) the massing of the proposed building relative to that of the existing Town Hall.

 

Town Hall portion of meeting

 

Announcements (0:40 elapsed)

 

            Selectman Musselman announced the closing of town offices on Monday, January 2, 2017.

 

Public Comment, Culvert Expense (1:02 elapsed)

 

            Phil Winslow referred to the expensive culvert replacements and the DES request for sizing based on technical information and storm surges.  He asked that the “roads” department provide a ten year estimate of cost.  These could be substantive and could really impact the financial position of the Town, he said.  Selectman Musselman said that there is a storm water plan that could be used to guide that.  He noted that the width of the culverts at Red Mill Ln. is set by the width of the stream, not storm surge or flow.  Editor’s note:  Mr. Winslow is a member of the Capital Improvement Plan Committee and the Planning Board.

 

Public Comment, $75,000 purchase of Transfer Station land (2:53 elapsed)

 

            Peter Crawford said that he was mystified to see in the Herald on the 22nd an article about the Town acquiring land that it thought it already owned for $75,000. 

            Selectman Musselman quipped “join the club” and laughed.

            Mr. Crawford said that he assumed that Selectman Musselman knew more than he did.  Selectman Musselman said “yes.”

            Mr. Crawford said that this raised a number of issues.  First, this seems to be several decades old, so he wondered why the Town did not own it by adverse possession.  Editor’s note:  See N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. (“RSA”) 508:2 (twenty years to bring an action to recover land).  Second, it seemed like the money had already been spent or was being spent this year.  Mr. Crawford said that he went through the budget and that he did not see any line item for land acquisition, other than one in the conservation budget.  He stated that he did not believe that the land was being acquired for conservation.  While the Selectmen have the ability to transfer money it has to be to a purpose that already existed, with at least one dollar appropriated.  Editor’s note:  See RSA 32:10, I(e). 

            Mr. Crawford also referred to RSA 41:14-a.  He said that the Selectmen are allowed to acquire land as that was voted in ten years ago and the attempt to remove that failed this year as a sentence was taken out of the warrant article.  However, the statute requires that the Planning Board and Conservation Commission provide their recommendations and that there be two public hearings.  It does not look like that is happening, as far as he knows, Mr. Crawford said.  Mr. Crawford asked what was going on and what could be released regarding the matter.

            Selectman Musselman said that this was a legal settlement and asked Town Administrator Magnant what could be said regarding it. 

            Mr. Magnant said that he had been advised previously by the Town Attorney, when he had been called by the Portsmouth Herald, not to say anything until it has found its way through the court system and has been finalized.

            Selectman Musselman said that the case could be discussed in more detail once that had been done. 

            Mr. Crawford asked whether the case was a public file at the Rockingham Superior Court.  Selectman Musselman confirmed and Town Administrator Magnant nodded affirmatively.

 

Consent Agenda (6:02 elapsed)

 

            Selectman Musselman announced the three items: (1) a Fire Department request to expend donations in the amount of $200; (2) request by Peter Crawford to collect signatures for petitioned warrant articles at the Recycling Center on Saturday 12/31/16 and Saturday 1/7/17; and (3) the appointment of Susan Shepcaro (who had served on the Trails Subcommittee) to the Conservation Commission, with a term expiring 2019.  Selectman Jenness moved to approve the Consent Agenda items and Selectman Musselman seconded.  All were in favor.

 

Minutes (7:04 elapsed)

 

            The minutes of the December 12, 2016 meeting were unanimously approved with changes.  The minutes of the non-public session of the same day were unanimously approved without changes.  The minutes of the public portion of the meeting on December 16, 2016 were unanimously approved.  The minutes of the non-public session of the same day were unanimously approved.

 

Mosquito Control Commission recommendation for 2017 services (12:30 elapsed)

 

            Town Administrator Magnant summarized, stating that the Commission was recommending that Dragon be awarded the contract for 2017, even though the cost was $4000 higher. 

            Selectman Musselman stated that he was comfortable with this.  The proposals had presented the rationale.  There is a significant difference with Dragon’s presence and they use a lot more BTI.

            Mr. Magnant spoke about the large number of complaints the prior summer.

            Selectman Jenness stated that the drought had created different problems than in prior years.  Selectman Musselman agreed, saying that there were fewer mosquitoes in some locations and many more in others.  Town Finance Director Cyndi Gillespie confirmed that sufficient funds were in the proposed budget to cover the higher Dragon cost.

            All were in favor of approving the award of the contract to Dragon.

 

Lack of Agreement with three town employees’ unions (15:26 elapsed)

 

            Town Administrator Magnant announced that the agreement with the DPW employees union had fallen through.  Selectman Musselman said that that was why Joe was going to be on the phone that evening as a third person was going to be needed for voting purposes.  Editor’s note:  Apparently Selectman Jenness was planning to recuse herself from the vote as her son works for the DPW.  That would have left the Board without a quorum, unless Selectman Joe Mills voted.  Selectman Mills has been ill and has not been to a meeting for several months. 

            Selectman Musselman said that there are no tentative agreements with the three unions.  Editor’s note:  The other two unions are for the Police and Fire employees respectively.  Selectman Musselman said that he understood that the issue was health insurance changes, which are rocking the world everywhere.  Town Administrator Magnant confirmed.  Selectman Musselman said that there was a committee with both the union members and town staff.  He asked whether the consensus of that committee had not carried the day.  Mr. Magnant said that it was difficult to discuss publicly due to the ground rules, however those recommendations were a factor in the negotiations.  Editor’s note:  Although not stated, there had been a concern in prior years about the “Cadillac Tax” on expensive health plans, and possible Town liability for the 40% excise tax.  The tax was originally to go into effect on January 1, 2018, but Congress has delayed the tax for two years.  This would seem to be after the end of the period to be covered by the typically three-year union agreements, however, as compensation under union agreements typically continues (although without wage increases) in the absence of a follow-on agreement, the Town may be trying to deal with this issue now, lest it suddenly be on the hook for large tax payments.

 

Red Mill Lane culvert replacements (17:35 elapsed)

 

            Public Works Director Dennis McCarthy reported that the low bid had come in at $220,000 for each of the culverts.  The next higher bid was $360,000 per culvert and the third bid was in excess of $400,000 per culvert, he said.  They were very expensive.  T-Buck is the low bidder and they do good work, Mr. McCarthy said.  He stated that $150,000 had been approved this year, but that would be gone as of December 31 if the amount is not encumbered.  Editor’s note:  This year, warrant article 7, passed 945-567.  It provides $150,000 for the purpose of replacing one or both culverts under Red Mill Ln.  Mr. McCarthy said that $150,000 is being carried for next year.  Editor’s note:  That is part of the Capital Outlay proposed budget, not a separate warrant article.

            Mr. McCarthy said that one option would be to do nothing and leave the money appropriated this year unspent.  Another option would be to encumber the funds and add them to next year’s appropriation.  There is a way to word the warrant article so that the money could be carried for more than one year, he said, but then acknowledged that next year’s proposed appropriation is not a warrant article.

            Mr. Magnant said that the funds may not lapse, given that the culvert replacement is a capital project.  Editor’s note:  He was apparently referring to RSA 32:7-a, however that requires that the appropriation specify the number of years for which it is in effect.  Funds may normally be encumbered (i.e. carried forward from the year of appropriation to a subsequent year) when there is a legally-enforceable contract or other obligation.  While there is an exception for special warrant articles, article 7 is listed as an individual, not special, warrant article, in the 2015 Town Annual Report.  See RSA 32:7 http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/III/32/32-7.htm and RSA 32:3, VI http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/III/32/32-3.htm.  Mr. McCarthy stated that he understood that the appropriation would lapse if the funds are not encumbered.

            Selectman Musselman asked when T-Buck’s bid for the second culvert would go away and whether it would need to be done in 2017.

            Mr. McCarthy said that it was an additive alternative, but in quick discussions they said it was a good price and unless there are some big changes they do not mind waiting.  Mr. McCarthy said that he would not plan on awarding both culverts in 2017.  If we want to use the $150,000, we have to award one this year, he said. 

            Selectman Musselman said that that would be with the understanding that the other $100,000 is budgeted.  He questioned whether that could be done.  Mr. McCarthy agreed. 

            Town Finance Director Cyndi Gillespie said that almost $8000 of the $150,000 had been spent, leaving $143,000.  She said that she recommends the fourth option, as $150,000 had been budgeted in Capital Outlay.  We have $293,000.  The Capital Outlay could be brought down from $150,000 to $110,000, she said. 

            Selectman Jenness asked whether there was a way to argue about the size.  The Concord Monitor quoted Phil, saying that a four foot by five foot culvert would be replaced by one twenty by six feet.  Editor’s note:  See http://granitegeek.concordmonitor.com/2016/12/01/n-h-actually-facing-climate-change-problems-along-seacoast/  She said that this was apples and oranges as the former is an inside measurement and the latter an outside measurement.   

            Mr. McCarthy said that it was as Selectman Musselman had said.  It is for stream morphology, he said.  In the old days a wide stream would be jammed through a narrow culvert, which creates flow and surcharging problems and issues with wildlife.  The State no longer allows that.  This is actually four feet narrower than the stream, he said. 

            Selectman Jenness said that 20 by 6 sounded gigantic.

            Selectman Musselman said that it has nothing to do with climate change. 

            Selectman Jenness said that the stream is five feet wide.

            Mr. McCarthy disagreed, saying that the bridge is five feet wide.  The stream is five feet wide only because it has been narrowed at that location. 

            Selectman Musselman asked what the elevation of the road is on either side of the bridge.  

            Mr. McCarthy said that the elevation of the road is slightly less.  The bridge is the high point.

            Selectman Musselman asked whether the bridge was being raised. 

            Mr. McCarthy said that it was not being raised.  It could still flood, but not significantly, he asserted.  In other words, not very often, he clarified.  Under our ocean rise category, only the lower culvert might flood, which means there would be access the other way.  Editor’s note:  Red Mill Ln. connects with Central Rd. at two points. 

            Selectman Musselman said that he wanted to make sure that neither the road nor the bridge was not being raised due to climate change or ocean levels. 

            Mr. McCarthy said that, because the new culvert would be a concrete box, the distance from the bridge to the top of the culvert would be a little bit less.  In response to a question from Selectman Musselman, he said that that has to do more with the nature of the structure. 

            Selectman Musselman said that he wanted to make sure that they were not raising the bridge and having the road flood on both sides. 

            Selectman Jenness referred to the possibility of exiting via Freddy Clark’s driveway.  Mr. McCarthy agreed there could be access that way.

            Mr. McCarthy said that the study that had been done showed that the only place that should be raised was the middle portion of Locke Rd. where it comes through the marsh.  The end of Locke Rd. by Old Beach Rd. stays dry, he said.  We can’t raise Harbor Rd. as it still floods everywhere.  It would have to raised a ridiculous amount to get everyone in and out.  Looking at Red Mill, it was realized that it would still flood, but not enough to warrant the cost to resolve the problem, he said. 

            Selectman Musselman quipped that the residents have dinghies.

            Mr. McCarthy asserted that, if the flooding is tide related it would only last for a few hours. 

            Selectman Jenness said that, by then, the State would be raising Route 1A. 

            Mr. McCarthy said that the State would need to do something with the box culvert as there are new dam regulations in effect.  He indicated that he was referring to the two pipes at Sawyers Beach.  The fact that Eel Pond is substandard is because it is a dam, he said. 

            Selectman Musselman, with concurrence from Selectman Jenness said that, in the 1800s that was a salt marsh.  It is now a mess and is going to get worse every year, he said. 

            Mr. McCarthy said that Eel Pond used to be drained by a stream adjacent to the Beach Club and the switching caused a problem.

            Selectman Jenness said that she had had a relative in the 1600s who kept a dam on Red Mill Ln. and was thus able to get there with his boat. 

 

(28:36 elapsed)

            Selectman Musselman asked whether a vote could be taken to lower the capital outlay by $40,000.  Ms. Gillespie confirmed.  She said that that would go to the Budget Committee on January 12.

            Selectman Musselman said that it was wise not to dive into two culverts.  With engineering costs the total cost would be $500,000.  Mr. McCarthy agreed and added that there would need to be a small contingency as well.

            Selectman Musselman said that Selectman Jenness’ question was a good one.  He asked how hard the wetlands people had been pushed to decrease the size of the culvert. 

            Mr. McCarthy said that they had pushed pretty hard.  Frank Richardson, who had helped to get the Wallis Rd. culvert through is now gone, he said.  The people who are there are less experienced and less sure of their positions with the State.  They do not want to take chances.  The approval that Frank gave them had that unbelievable sentence that said that the culvert would not cause problems with the neighbor who was already in court with the Town, he said.  Editor’s note:  See Beliveau v. Town of Rye, case 13-cv-00402 in U.S. District Court, District of New Hampshire.  The case was ultimately dismissed, but that may have been because it was settled.  According to court filings, the suit accuses the Town, its Conservation Commission, and the Conservation Commission’s then-Chairman Jim Raynes of certain actions that diminished the value of the Beliveau’s property through the relocation of Parsons Creek.  The suit also alleged that the work was done without proper permits having been obtained.  At one point, according to court documents, the proposed settlement provided that the Town was to pay up to $10,000 for 1814 cubic yards of fill to be deposited on Mr. Beliveau’s property, apparently to restore land that had washed away due to the relocation of the creek.    

            Selectman Musselman asked whether Wright Pierce had had a wetlands scientist involved.  Mr. McCarthy said that he understood that they had, but they had not been able to get any traction with the State.  Selectman Musselman noted a reduction from 20 feet to 16 feet.  He said that he wanted to get it below 10 feet so that it would not be considered a bridge. 

            Selectman Jenness asked how many more culverts this close to the ocean would need to be replaced. 

            Mr. McCarthy said that the rest that exist are not in as bad a shape, so it would be a long time.  However, the culvert at Locke Rd. will need to be redone at some point.  That will have the same issue.  It is a small box culvert in a wide natural opening.  All of them are.  That’s how they used to be designed, he said. 

            Selectman Jenness said that the straight ditches in the marsh had been created after World War II.  She said that she is not sure that those were completely natural. 

            Selectman Musselman asked about the status of the dam at Burke’s Pond, which, he said was not in good shape.  Mr. McCarthy said that he believes that that is fine and that “they” had just gotten their dam inspection. 

            Selectman Musselman asked about the culvert on Central Rd. that had recently been replaced.  Mr. McCarthy said that that is on the list but is way out.  Love Ln. is a higher priority, he said.

            Mr. McCarthy said that most of what is coming up is regular culverts, not box culverts. 

            Selectman Jenness moved to reduce the Capital Outlay for Red Mill Ln. by $40,000 to $110,000.  All were in favor.

            Mr. McCarthy asked about the encumbrance.  Ms. Gillespie indicated that that would be discussed later in the meeting.

 

Date for Town Hall bond hearing (34:21 elapsed)

 

            Town Finance Director stated that the Portsmouth Herald has new rules for the placement of legal notices.  If put in by noon tomorrow (the 28th), the posting would be on the third.  The posting must be seven days in advance, which would take the hearing out to January 11.  That is the night of the School Budget Public Hearing.  The twelfth is the night of the Town Budget Public Hearing.  The last date on which a bond hearing can be held is the 17th.

            Selectman Musselman said that he hoped that the decision on the content of the warrant article and the amount would be made prior to the bond hearing. 

            Selectman Musselman raised the possibility of a $3 million Conservation Bond.  He asked whether they would also need to have a bond hearing on or before the 17th.  Town Administrator Magnant affirmed.  He also stated that the Town Attorney had opined that the figure for the amount of any bond should be available prior to the hearing being noticed. 

            Selectman Musselman said that, while the Town Attorney had opined that a number was needed, it could be changed.  The Town Attorney had suggested that the initial number be high so that it could be adjusted downwards, Selectman Musselman said.

            Selectman Musselman asked whether they hadn’t done this differently once before.  “Oh, we had to go to the Legislature.”  Editor’s note:  In 2014, the public hearing on the $3 million Conservation Bond occurred after the date required by the RSAs.  Initially, it was planned that there would be a Special Town Meeting to cure the defect.  However, after recount, 2014 Article 7 passed with only six votes to spare.  There was a danger that the Special Town Meeting would fail to cure the defect with the necessary 60 percent vote.  A decision was made to have the New Hampshire Legislature attach a non-germane amendment to an existing bill to cure the irregularity.  See 2014 HB1124 at http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/bill_Status/bill_docket.aspx?lsr=2162&sy=2014&sortoption=billnumber&txtsessionyear=2014&txtbillnumber=hb1124.

            There was concern that there would not be enough time to conduct a public hearing on the bond issue as well as hold the public hearing on the town budget the same night.

 

(40:22 elapsed)

            Selectman Musselman questioned the advisability of noticing a bond hearing with a number prior to a meeting to discuss which alternative to pursue, saying that it did not make any sense.  He continued, saying  “You know, the whole thing doesn’t make any sense.  It’s too quick.”

            It was decided that the bond hearing would be scheduled for the 17th.  If it snows the hearing would need to go ahead, he said.  Ms. Gillespie said that the notice would need to be provided to the Herald by the fifth or the sixth. 

            Selectman Musselman suggested another Selectmen’s meeting on the third to have people come in and express their views and another one on the ninth.  Then the notice could go to the Herald on the sixth.  At the end of the public discussion, the Selectmen would consider what they want for a warrant article.  The hearing would be the 17th.

            This plan appeared to be agreed.

 

Budget Work Session, encumbrances (43:46 elapsed)

 

            Selectman Musselman said that a motion was needed to encumber the funds on Cyndi Gillespie’s list.  Editor’s list:  That list includes $264,109.00 to Specialty Vehicles, Inc. for an ambulance and $143,230.11 to T-Buck for Red Mill Ln. Culvert Construction.  Selectman Jenness moved to encumber the total of $500,561.95.  All were in favor.  Selectman Jenness moved to encumber an addition $25,692.34 for the Sewer Fund.  All were in favor. 

 

Temporary adjournment (44:46 elapsed)

 

            The motion to go into temporary adjournment while they move to the Library carried unanimously.

 

Library portion of meeting:  Town Hall presentation and questions

 

            Editor’s Note:  This portion of the meeting is on a different video.  See the note at the beginning for information on accessing.  The elapsed times hereinafter are relative to the start of the Library video.

 

Introduction by Selectman Musselman (0:00 elapsed)

 

            Selectman Musselman said that they had been working on various Town Hall issues for the last four or five years.  This fall they came up with the thought that design/build proposals for either renovation or demolition and construction of a replica would be sought.  The RFP was sent out in October to the four contractors who had bid on the previous project.  Proposals were due December 8.  Two proposals, both from Hutter Construction, were received.

            The purpose of tonight’s meeting is to hear a presentation from Hutter and to clarify it.  Electronic copies of the proposals were sent out to members of the various Town Hall committees.  A copy was also posted on the Town website.  Input was received from a number of people who had served on the committees.  Their questions were taken and a list of 15 questions was formulated for Hutter and had been sent to them.  Once the 15 questions have been asked and responded to, the meeting will be opened to the public, Selectman Musselman said. 

            The discussion tonight should be limited to understanding their proposals, he said.  There will be multiple public meetings after this one.  The first one will be Tuesday night, January 3.  That Board of Selectmen meeting will be solely for receiving input from residents on what they think we should do.  It will be debated again at the regular meeting on January 9.  If we decide to move forward with a warrant article, between the 3rd and the 9th a notice would be sent to the Herald to publicize a bond hearing.  The hearing would need to be held by January 17, which means it would need to be in the paper by the 10th and the Herald would need to get it by the 6th.  Thus, there will be three opportunities to provide input on what we should do, he said.  Additional information will be developed as we go.  If there is to be a warrant article, it will include construction costs as well as soft costs.  Town Hall would need to be relocated elsewhere for a year and an architect would need to be hired to deal with construction and design issues.  There will be an estimate of those costs on the 3rd, with refined estimates on the 9th and the 17th, he said.

            Ray Jarvis asked why there was only one bid. 

            Selectman Musselman described the prior process which led to four bids and the $4.1 million warrant article.  Editor’s note:  There were actually only three bids received as Milestone, which had also provided cost estimates to SMP, the architect, during 2013-2014, declined to bid.  At the bid opening on January 7, 2015, the following were the results:

 

                                                            Hutter              DEW               Meridian

            Base bid                             $3,240,000      $3,947,000        $3,856,550        

            Total of alternates              $   281,800      $   260,850        $   261,680

            Bid with all alternates        $3,521,800      $4,207,850        $4,098,230

 

The Town Hall Committee decided to proceed with Hutter as the low bidder and to select some, but not all, of the alternates.  Alternates are separately itemized costs for discrete aspects of the construction that the town could choose to accept, or not, as it chose.  With the selected alternates, Hutter’s bid came to $3,389,600.  The warrant article was for $4.1 million, indicating that the additional costs to be borne by the town for architectural and project management assistance, furniture, contingency, etc. amounted to more than $700,000.

            Selectman Musselman said that they had already heard from two of the potential bidders that they were too busy and would not be responding.  On December 8 they found that Hutter was the only one submitting a proposal.  Hutter was the low bidder previously by quite a bit.  They had thought that SMP, who was the previous architect, would join one of the design/build teams, but they were too busy to devote time to the project, so Hutter has been working with another architect.         

 

Presentation of Eric Hastings of Hutter (10:10 elapsed)

 

            Editor’s note:  According to a January 26, 2015 item on Hutter’s website at http://www.hutterconstruction.com/News.asp, Mr. Hastings joined Hutter as Director of Estimating.  This date was shortly after submission of the prior Hutter bid. 

            Mr. Hastings said he had been doing this type of work for 37 years.  Mr. Hutter showed a drawing of the building and pointed out the building and the addition.  Editor’s note:  The video shows that the roof drops slightly when moving from the main building to the area over the stage, and then again slightly when moving from the stage area to the addition.  While the area over the stage currently has a hip roof, all three sections have gabled roofs in the drawing.  The drawing and floor plan presented on the screen by Mr. Hastings appeared to match those in the bid available on the Town website at http://town.rye.nh.us/Pages/RyeNH_BComm/BoS/Hutter Proposal for Rye Town Hall.pdf. 

            Mr. Hastings started by explaining the renovation option proposal.  Mr. Hastings said that they had planned to take off a small portion at the east end which is about 35 feet wide and 9 feet deep.  Editor’s note:  These are sometimes referred to as the “porches” and are used for storage of Building Department files on the first floor, and until recently, the Recreation Department on the second floor.  That was done to maximize the size of the addition so that the systems and functions that need to be in the new construction could be contained there, he said.  The center area and main building on the first floor would be gutted out with all new rooms.  The two spiral stairways would remain intact.  To meet NFPA codes the stairways would need to be enclosed for fire protection.  Mr. Hastings then pointed to the Town Clerk, Planning and Building Inspection areas on the first floor.  There would also be two new bathrooms and a break area, a brand new mechanical room, electrical room, mail area, elevator and additional stairwell that is needed.  He pointed to a new vestibule and entrance on the south side of the addition. 

            Mr. Hastings responded to a question from Ray Jarvis regarding the Town Clerk and Planning service counters. 

            In response to a question from John Loftus, Mr. Hastings indicated that steel I beams are planned only for the new construction option.  However, there are new steel columns on the north and south outside walls that go up two stories, he said. 

            Selectman Musselman pointed out that the building had not been designed yet.  Mr. Hastings confirmed that nothing was cast in stone. 

 

(17:40 elapsed)

            Turning to the second floor, Mr. Hastings pointed  to the large public meeting in the addition on the second floor, the stairs, elevator and lobby.  There is a winding sidewalk going to the rear parking lot as in the prior proposal.  There is the stage and a lift at the back to bridge the 2.5 to 3 foot height difference.  The front of the stage is still there but enclosed with a clear glass wall so it could be used as a meeting room.  He pointed to the Town Administrator’s Office, Assessor’s Office, Finance, and a small office for part-time use by the Selectmen and a small Treasurer’s Office.  He pointed to the spiral stairs and two bathrooms at the west end.

 

(20:20 elapsed)

            Mr. Hastings then showed the floor plans for the new build option.  He pointed to the new columns and beams and the issue of first floor headroom.  The second floor is the same but the toilets were moved to reduce the cost.  The Treasurer’s Office was moved and enlarged but the rest basically remained the same.  The meeting room is somewhat smaller than the stage in the other option.

 

Compiled questions (22:45 elapsed)

 

            Selectman Musselman passed out copies of the questions posed by Town Committee members, apologizing that there were not enough copies for everyone in the audience. 

            Selectman Musselman pointed out that there had been little interaction with Hutter as is customary with design/build bids.  Town Administrator Magnant met with the architect for about an hour to show him through the building, he said.  The programming and previous design were shown to him. 

            Selectman Musselman asked about the flexibility to move the space around without impacting the proposed price.  Mr. Hastings said that there was, however when circulation is changed, doors may need to be moved and there may be issues with load bearing walls. 

            Selectman Musselman asked whether the second floor offices have ceilings or whether they would be open to the tin ceiling above.  Mr. Hastings said that the walls go all of the way up, but the ceilings are exposed in the corridor.  Selectman Musselman asked about the possibility of moving Building upstairs and Town Administrator and Finance downstairs.  Mr. Hastings expressed concern about relocating the Town Clerk and vault upstairs.  Selectman Musselman said that the Town Clerk would remain downstairs and they have budgeted digitizing all of the Building Department files.  Mr. Hastings expressed concern about the weight.  Selectman Musselman said that the storage room would be gone.  He asked Town Administrator Magnant whether enough money had been budgeted to digitize all of the files.  Mr. Magnant expressed uncertainty, but said that the lion’s share could be done.  His biggest concern is the staff working in modulars during construction, he said.

            Selectman Musselman asked about the location of the second floor ceiling in the new building option.  Mr. Hastings said that it was at the top of the monumental windows, about twelve feet above the floor. 

            Selectman Musselman asked about first floor ceiling heights.  Mr. Hastings said that, for the renovation, they would pretty much be stuck with an eight foot ceiling except that ductwork would be hidden along the walls of the corridors, coming down to about seven feet, six inches.  Mr. Hastings said that the distance between floors is only about nine feet, six inches.  He said that the new construction option could have the floor raised six inches without moving the windows.  The building would look the same. 

            Selectman Musselman asked what was proposed with respect to the monumental windows in the renovation option.  He said that the previous proposal had allowed for use of the existing windows with double panes.  Mr. Hastings said that new Marvin windows had been provided throughout.  The option of window renovation would still be available, however he had not been able to get renovators to respond with costs at this stage of the process.  In response to a question from the audience regarding other possible suppliers, Mr. Hastings said that he had found that Marvin was the way to go.

 

(30:45 elapsed)

            Selectman Musselman asked whether it was reasonable to scrape and paint the siding when the previous design included the replacement of all siding.  How far does $15,000 go, he asked.  Mr. Hasting said that it would only provide for 20-25 percent of the cost.  To keep the cost down, I chose not to rip it all off, but rather try to save it, he said.  He also said that the south wall could be replaced and the north wall left.

            Selectman Musselman said that the proposal indicates that there would be no backup furnace for the HVAC system, even though the backup system is needed now to deal with peak demands.  He also asked whether the geothermal system was proposed to service the entire building and whether the gas units could provide for peak needs.  Mr. Hastings said that the existing geothermal system was planned to deal with the existing building.  They were comfortable doing that as about 10 percent of the square footage was taken off, replacement windows would seal the building up and there would be new insulation in the walls and attic.  There would still need to be load calculations.  He said that, if it looks like it is going to be close, they would provide for supplemental units.

            Selectman Musselman asked about protection from falling ice and snow.  He referred to the need the prior year to put up scaffolding to protect people from falling ice.  Mr. Hastings said that, with proper insulation, there should not be icicles.  The canopy on the new building goes out five feet.  However, the ice buildup may have to be removed.

            Selectman Musselman asked about the potential additional costs to remove lead paint and light ballasts.  Mr. Hastings said that they followed the report by RPF Associates, which is a top notch firm in New Hampshire.  They are very thorough, so everything should be provided for, he said. 

            Selectman Musselman asked about prior renovations.  Mr. Hastings referred to the Mark Wentworth home in Portsmouth.  Selectman Musselman chuckled and said that they are having interesting dealings with that organization.  Editor’s note:  See earlier in these notes.  The Town has agreed to pay $75,000 to purchase approximately 1 acre at the Transfer Station that it thought that it already owned, from Wentworth Senior Living.  Mr. Hastings referred to a substantial renovation job there. 

            Selectman Musselman asked about risks that might not currently be known.  Mr. Hastings referred to the possibility of unseen ledge and boulders when the slab on the first floor is removed.  He raised the possibility that the slab might have been poured over loam 150-200 years ago or buried stumps.  He referred also to the possibility of termites or carpenter ants when the drywall and plaster are removed. 

            Selectman Musselman asked whether a five percent contingency was adequate to deal with unknowns.  Mr. Hastings said that he did. 

 

 (38:03 elapsed)

            Victor Azzi asked about Hutter’s contingency.  Mr. Hastings said that he had provided his own contingency.  He provided details on what he had excluded and included and what would come out of his contingency versus the Town’s.  He said that they had provided for the building to be jacked up so that the steel columns could be installed. 

            Selectman Musselman asked what components of the existing building would remain.  Mr. Hastings referred to the entire perimeter except for the drywall and plaster finish on the inside.  He said that the windows would be removed.  The entire framing on the second floor would remain.  The two spiral stairs would remain.  The slab through the main building excluding the front portion where the spiral stairs are would be replaced.  The three interior walls running north/south would remain on both levels.  Other than that it would be completely emptied.  The roof and shingles stay on the main building, but not the stage area and addition.  He asked how old the roof was.  The response was five years.  He said that it should not be difficult to match in that case.

            Selectman Musselman asked about the septic system and what EnviroTube is.  He noted that the previous Building Committee had found EnviroSeptic to be unacceptable.  Mr. Hastings said that there was no need for a concrete chamber septic system in a grass area so he was able to save $13,000 by eliminating that. 

            Selectman Musselman asked whether a basement had been considered for mechanicals and storage and, if so, why a basement is not proposed.  Mr. Hastings said he did not even consider a basement as enough room was given to him in the addition for the stairwell, elevator, electrical and mechanical rooms plus the meeting room on the second floor.  The bearing wall between the stage area and the addition only goes down three feet.  If a basement were to be added, that whole end of the building would need to be shored up.  It would be way too costly, he said.  Working within the 20 foot extension and adding the removal of the nine feet of the existing building gave them all of the room that they needed, he said. 

 

(43:22 elapsed)

            Selectman Musselman asked whether the fire protection system would be wet or dry and who would design it.  Mr. Hastings said that it would be a wet system throughout the building except in the attic where it would be a dry system.  Superior Fire Protection in Auburn will design and the Rye Fire Department would review it.  Selectman Musselman asked whether the wet system would freeze, absent a generator, in the event of a prolonged power outage.  Mr. Hastings said that it would take a long one and that the building would be well insulated. 

            Victor Azzi asked whether, in the existing building, the underside of the roof or the floor of the attic would be insulated.  Mr. Hastings said that R-20 spray foam insulation would be provided for the walls and R-40 blown in cellulose was provided above the tin ceiling.  The attic space would remain cold.  That is where the dry sprinkler system would be.  Any wet pipes would be on the warm side of the insulation, he said. 

            John Loftus asked about the type of piping.  Selectman Musselman said that it had not been designed yet.  Mr. Hastings said that he would look into the issue and get back to Mr. Loftus.

            Selectman Musselman asked whether the spiral staircases would be grandfathered.  Mr. Hastings said that he would not doubt that, but he would need to check with the local code official.  He said that the entire design had better be code compliant as that is owed to the Town. 

            Selectman Musselman asked whether the proposal incorporates the RFP.  Mr. Hastings said that he could not confirm as Hutter’s contracts official has not reviewed.

 

Questions from the public (48:09 elapsed)

 

            Phil Winslow asked about the difference in usable space for offices and meeting rooms, compared to circulation, between the renovation and new build options.  Mr. Hastings said that he would go back and check it, but circulation is typically in the 30 percent range.  He said that the designs are almost twins.  The Treasurer’s Office is bigger and the bathrooms were moved because the stage area was shrunk, he said.

            Frances Erlebacher said that the front door in the new building looked like it was glass.  She asked whether something typical from the period could have been chosen.  Mr. Hastings said that that could be looked at.  An aluminum entrance was chosen for durability.  Ms. Erlebacher said that most people in town wanted to keep the style.

            Ms. Erlebacher asked why the offices were located away from the first floor entrance to the new building.  Mr. Hastings said that the addition is directly across the parking lot from where water, sewer and electrical service would come in underground.  The best way to do it is to bring those into an area that is newly constructed area.  You would not even know that the mechanical and electrical rooms are there as they would be closed off. 

            Selectman Musselman said that there was a discussion yet to occur with the architect and town staff on moving things around.

            Mike Steinberg asked about the life span of the building.  He said that there is no room for growth.  The building is maxed out right now, he said.  He asked about the square footage per floor and the possibility of a basement.  Mr. Hastings said that there are 3950 sq. ft. per floor, 7900 sq. ft. total.  Mr. Steinberg argued that an additional 3950 sq. ft. would provide a lot of space for relocating functions.  Then there would not be a need for another addition in 10-20 years.  There is not enough room for expansion now, he said.  The basement could be used for mechanical and storage areas, he said.  He asked about rearranging the second floor of the new building so that a partition could be removed, creating a larger room.  Mr. Hastings said that that was definitely a possibility.

            Victor Azzi asked whether there were steps at the entrance to the new addition.  Mr. Hastings responded that it was flush.  Mr. Azzi asked about the enclosure of the curvilinear stairs in closets in the design of the renovation, but the stairs in the new building design not being enclosed in a comparable way.  Mr. Hastings said that new construction would allow that to be fire rated.  Mr. Azzi said that entering a closet to see the beginning of the stair makes no architectural sense.

            Mr. Azzi asked whether the design had been done by an architect.  Mr. Hastings said that Paul Addison is working with them and did the design.  He is not present as it is a tough week, he said. 

 

(59:10 elapsed)

            Ray Jarvis asked about the expected longevity of one proposal compared to the other.  He asked how long it would be before major expenses would need to be incurred.  Mr. Hastings said that the foundation, which is a combination of concrete and stone, had been there for close to 200 years and has held up well.  In the absence of an earthquake or sewer line failure, he does not see why the building would not remain intact for another 50 years.  The new area would easily last for 100 years.  He acknowledged that, if the whole building were redone, it would last for 100 years.  He referred to better building techniques being used now. 

            Peter Crawford said that, looking at the plans, it looks like the roof on the addition is maybe three or four feet lower.  He said that he recalls that the ceiling height is about 19 feet in the main building.  Mr. Hastings said that it is 17 feet 6 inches.  He said that, the longer the addition is the more it is appropriate to break up the lines and there is no need to make the addition as high.

            Mr. Crawford said that he was suggesting the opposite, which is that it seems that the addition could be lower.  Using the 17.5 foot number and dropping back to 9 feet, the addition could be about 8.5 feet lower. 

            Selectman Musselman said that, with a meeting room of that size, you do not want an 8.5 to 9 foot ceiling.  Editor’s note:  The Library meeting room in which this meeting was occurring has a ceiling 7 feet 8 inches high.  Mr. Crawford suggested that it could be 10 feet.  Selectman Musselman said 10 plus. 

            Mr. Hastings referred to the space needed for the elevator shaft.  Mr. Crawford asked whether the elevator could be moved, swapping it with the stairs and be able to lower the ceiling height.  Editor’s note:  He meant the roof height.  Mr. Crawford said that, perhaps he was wrong, but he understood that a hydraulic elevator did not need space above it.  Mr. Hastings said that he needed 12 foot 3 inch clearance from the second floor to the top of the elevator shaft for safety space in case someone is up there when the elevator ascends.  He said that the lower level of the addition is raised by ramping up by about a foot between the existing building and the addition.

            Mr. Crawford said that some might say that the addition might look more subservient if the roof line on the addition was a little bit lower.  He asked what would need to be done to accomplish that. 

            Selectman Musselman said that he was shocked that the Rye Heritage Commission had looked at it and said that both alternatives looked subservient and appropriate.  He said that he was very surprised.  I was surprised that they agreed.  They haven’t agreed to anything yet, he said.  He attempted to call on a woman in the back.

            Mr. Crawford interrupted, saying that he had asked a question a requested a response before moving on.

            Mr. Hastings said that he wouldn’t recommend lowering the roof.  He referred to the need for a higher ceiling in the meeting room and also over the lift.  If someone is standing on the platform, which goes up about two feet, you don’t want them punching into the ceiling, he said.  Editor’s note:  If the ceiling is 10 feet high, that would take an individual who is 8 feet tall.  Mr. Hastings said that it could be moved down a bit and that could certainly be looked at.       

            Tricia, a woman in the back, asked about the noise with the tin ceiling.  Selectman Musselman said that the acoustics when it was a Selectman’s space was not good.  She asked a follow-on question about maintenance under the two options.  Mr. Hastings said that it would be painted pine or cedar clapboards with either option.  To avoid changing from the current historic look, he didn’t dare pick vinyl or aluminum.  He acknowledged that it would not be maintenance-free.

 

(69:05 elapsed)

            Joe Tucker asked what concessions would be needed with a renovation that would not be needed with new construction.  He gave the example of new construction starting with crushed stone and perimeter drains and an elastomeric membrane on the outside of the foundation with a fifteen year warranty for waterproofing.  He asked whether there was a plan to excavate around the existing foundation to waterproof it.  Mr. Hastings said that that was not planned.  He said that the new slab would have 8 inches of crushed stone with piping for radon.  The old plan showed a French drain around the back side which was retained.  In the addition the foundation would be waterproofed, he said. 

            Mr. Tucker said that, if radiant heat is to be used, insulation under the floor is needed.  There would not be adequate space between the floors if recessed lighting were to be used above.  Mr. Hastings agreed that the space was very limited.  With new construction the joists could be deeper, Mr. Tucker said.  Mr. Hastings asked whether radiant heat was being considered.  Selectman Musselman said that it was not.

            Mr. Hastings said that he had used steel beams in the new construction option to limit the span of the joists and the space needed if he is required to keep the look and the overall height.  Right now the window sill is about 30 inches high.  That could perhaps be altered by six inches to pick up more room, although that has not been priced, he said. 

            Town Finance Director Cyndi Gillespie asked whether access to the belfry via the spiral stairs would remain.  Mr. Hastings said that the bathrooms at that level had been eliminated, but he planned to leave the stairwell there.  Ms. Gillespie said that there is a small storage room there.  Editor’s note:  This has been used in the past for the storage of old financial records.  Selectman Musselman pointed out that the space would be unheated.

            Steven Borne asked what the cost would be if the expansion in the back was not needed.  Selectman Musselman said that then there would be no meeting room, elevator, stairway or mechanical room.  Mr. Borne said that he was looking for the cost to renovate the existing building.  Mr. Hastings said that it would not be to code.  Mr. Borne said that there was plenty of space in town, but the building is falling apart.  He attempted to ask for Mr. Hastings’ best estimate but Selectman Musselman said that that was another alternative for discussion on the third and the ninth.  Mr. Hastings said that, if he put a number on that, it would make the rest of the building unusable. 

            John Loftus asked about the foundation.  He said that the south wall foundation was to be removed and that it has had remedial work over the years.  He asked about possible problems with the rest of the rubble foundation and the likelihood of having to replace the entire foundation.  Mr. Hastings said that he could not answer that, however the majority of the building must be safety jacked up.  Mr. Loftus argued that there was a possibility that the entire building would need to be jacked up to replace the foundation.  Mr. Hastings appeared to agree and asked about the age of the concrete foundation on the north side.  Town Administrator Magnant said that the records had been reviewed and that nothing was found on this.  Mr. Hastings said that Steffensen Engineering had done a thorough job and, if they were concerned about it, they are the type of company that would have recommended fixing it. 

            Victor Azzi asked what would happen if, after jacking up the building and removing the south wall it is determined that the rest of the foundation needs to be replaced.  He asked whether the cost would come out of the construction contingency or the owner’s contingency.  Mr. Hastings said that it would come out of the owner’s contingency as he had been given explicit instructions to just replace the south wall.   Mr. Azzi asked about the foundation.  Selectman Musselman said that, in the prior design, the south wall was bid as an option.  Editor’s note:  The Hutter bid for that option was $15,800, the DEW bid $26,800 and the Meridian bid $46,000.  The others walls are more substantial and visible, except below grade, Selectman Musselman said.  He said that a sub grade issue is not likely on this site.  The building has been in place since 1839 and there is no indication of settlement of the other walls.  It is more likely that the slab had been poured on native sand than on loam.  Mr. Azzi said that most people are concerned about possible surprises.  The North and East walls have lateral pressures because of the slope so it’s possible that the concrete slab is helping those foundation walls to remain stable, he said.

            Mr. Azzi asked about the shutters shown and whether they were wood or plastic.  Mr. Hastings said that they were wood.  He asked about the upper level floor plan of the existing building and access via the curvilinear stairs.  He asked about the benefit of preserving the curve of the stage and the proscenium arch if it is to be covered in glass.  Selectman Musselman said that the Heritage Commission wanted there to be nothing to preclude the return of the stage to its prior use.  The question was whether anything irreversible was being done to the Great Hall, he said. 

           

(87:00 elapsed)

            Ritchie White asked what would happen if the expenses exceeded the five percent contingency.  Selectman Musselman said that it would need to be worked out with the design/build contractor.  There is not the choice of spending more money.

            Monica McCarthy asked about the amount of additional usable space.  Mr. Hastings pointed to the addition and said that it is 2400 sq. ft.  Selectman Musselman said that that includes the nine foot bump out being removed.  There is a total of 7900 sq. ft. on the two floors.  Ms. McCarthy said that the incremental square footage is about 2400.  Selectman Musselman agreed.  He said that this is scaled down to the minimum needed.  Recreation and Sewer have been moved out.  This is the minimum that we can get by with if we’re going to renovate for Town Hall purposes, he said.  Ms. McCarthy asked why a larger building wouldn’t be built.  Selectman Musselman said that they had tried once before and it cost more and nobody wanted to pay more, and still do not.  With the bump out in the back there is concern that, if it gets longer, its not architecturally going to match the existing building, he said. 

            Ann Malpass asked why the new building was going to cost more than the renovation.  Mr. Hastings said that it would cost $50,000 to remove the existing building.  A new foundation would be needed.  There is a whole new second floor structure compared to saving the existing structure.  There is a whole new roof structure, tower and roofing.  Selectman Musselman said that it was a better building, but costs a little bit more. 

            Paul Goldman referred to the $200,000 higher price for the new building, and said that that is a certainty with no surprises.  Mr. Hastings said that there would be much stronger certainty.  Mr. Goldman referred to previous questions about expansion.  He asked the Town Administrator and Town Finance Director how long the designs, which are essentially equivalent, would carry them into the future. 

            Mr. Magnant said that the greatest constraint is in the Building Department and there is room for a second Building Inspector there.  The space for the Town Clerk’s office is adequate.  A second person will eventually be needed for Finance or the Selectmen’s Office.  Right now there is space for that in these designs.  Beyond that it would be tight.  What is going to help is scanned and digitized records.  Selectman Musselman referred to people doing things online.  Forty years from now, millennials will be old and they will be acting differently, he said. 

            Diane Bitter asked about the stage being lost, but there being a large meeting room in the new section.  She suggested moving the Town Administrator’s office and two other offices to the addition so that the original function of the stage could be retained.  Someone asked how often the stage would be used.  Ms. Bitter said that it is not the stage but the room.  If it has that capacity there are many more options as it would fit more people, she said.

            Selectman Musselman said that when it had been used that way, it was half of the room, the back side.  The acoustics were not good.  A large space would be heated and not used efficiently.  Mel Low confirmed.  Editor’s note:  Mel Low used to be a Selectman.  Mr. Low said that sometimes the public was up high and would talk down to them.  There was laughter.

            Selectman Musselman said that the previous design had the Great Hall as well as a more accommodating meeting space.  It is an idea, however, he said.

            Victor Azzi said that, whichever option is chosen, the cost would be close to $500 per sq. ft. for about 8000 sq. ft. of gross area.  That is a lot of money and a high unit cost.  Once the soft costs and contingencies are added, the cost is between $400 and $500, and probably closer to $500.  Mr. Azzi said that the massing of the proposed building is in no way pleasing and not what we’re accustomed to seeing.  It is not anywhere close to the existing building.  He suggested optimizing the design to maximize the usable area with a building of comparable massing and comparable design.  He asked what 8000 sq. ft. of new construction with a suitable aspect ratio would cost. 

            Selectman Musselman reposed the question and asked what Hutter would have done on the site if 8000 sq. ft. were required without the constraint of using the same size as the existing building with the bump out and the same elevations.  Mr. Hastings said that the per square foot cost is being warped by the design fees that are not normally a construction cost.  In addition, there are demolition and asbestos removal costs.  There is about $550,000 of the $3.1 million that is not construction cost, he said. 

            Mr. Azzi said that he is talking about the project cost which must be borne by the owners, of which there are a number here. 

            Mr. Hastings said that he does not think that the construction costs are out of line.  It is not a $500 per square foot project.  Selectman Musselman said that it would not be $500 per sq. ft. as the cost would not be $4 million.  He promised that the warrant article would not be $4 million. 

            John Loftus said that last year he had suggested three stories with a full basement and full attic.  The mechanical facilities could go in the basement.  Mr. Azzi said that that would be an optimal design.  Selectman Musselman interrupted and said that that was an issue for a later meeting.

            Peter Crawford said that he had used $3.2 million for the project cost, added $300,000 to the Hutter bid and came up with $400 per sq. ft. for the 8000 sq. ft. building.  Taking the $4.1 million which was the warrant article last time and the 12,500 sq. ft. size, the cost of that would have been $328 per sq. ft.  The cost per sq. ft. has gone up very significantly, he said.  He asked for an explanation. 

            Mr. Hastings stated that their bid last time was $3,240,000.  Selectman Musselman confirmed.  Editor’s note:  That figure is before alternates.  See the note above providing detailed bid data.  The selected alternates added $149,600, including $15,800 for a new concrete foundation on the South side, $43,500 for a new concrete slab, $72,700 for a generator and $17,600 for lightning protection.  It appears that the first two are also part of the current proposal but the third is not.  It is unclear whether or not the proposal includes lightning protection.  Mr. Hastings referred to 11,000 sq. ft. of construction.  Editor’s note:  That is incorrect.  Taking measurements off the large-scale drawings to the nearest 1/32 of an inch yields 12,619 sq. ft. of space, including 200 sq. ft. for the connector between the buildings and 413 sq. ft. for the third floor of the existing building which was to include new bathrooms.  Mr. Hastings said that they are now responsible for design and engineering costs that they normally do not carry.  Things change a lot in two years in terms of material and subcontractor pricing.  There is a lot of work out there now, he said.  Construction costs are up.  We went after this very hard and attached reasonable costs.  We think we have the right number for this project.  This is our type of work.  We love jobs like this.  We’ll stand behind our number, he said.

            Selectman Musselman said that the meeting on January 3 would probably be at the Library and at 6:30 p.m.

 

Adjournment (107:45 elapsed)

 

            The meeting adjourned at approximately 8:17 p.m.