East Haddam School Building Committee Meeting

March 30, 2005

Adopted April 27, 2005

Call to Order

The meeting was called to order by Todd Moss at 7:02 p.m. at the Nathan Hale High School – Room 117.

Roll Call

Attendance

Members present:

Todd Moss Melissa Ziobron

Mary Beth Mordecai Kerri Willis Budzik

John Gibson David LaFemina

Denise Gable Craig Parker

Dana Barnes- departed 8:00p.m.

Members absent:

None

Others present:

Selectman Brad Parker, Board of Selectman

David King, KBA

Robert Carroll, Central Office, Board of Education Business Manager

Shirley Judge

Approval of Minutes

Motion by Melissa Ziobron to approve the minutes of the March 2^nd , 2005 meeting. Seconded by Mary Beth Mordecai.

Favor: Moss, Mordecai, Ziobron, Parker, Budzik, LaFemina

Abstained: Barnes

MOTION CARRIED

Audience of Citizens

There was no Audience of Citizens segment offered.

Old Business

Todd Moss informed Committee Members that future agendas would include an item titled Architectural Report. Dave King informed the Committee that the Civil Engineer was currently on site performing monitoring wells and the preliminary soil samples for septic design. He stated they would coordinate a representative from DEP to come to the site for a walk through proposal. He explained the benefit of the monitoring wells during the spring thaw allowing the fluctuations of ground water to be observed. He stated that Phase 1 Environmental Report’s low bidder was granted to Fuss McNeil at $2,100 and the Traffic Consultant would be Barkan and Mess for $8,500. Kerri Budzik requested record in the minutes stating that the selection process for the Environmental Report and Traffic Consultant was made by KBA and not the School Building Committee. Mr. Moss questioned Mr. King if the traffic study would make recommendations for off site improvements. Mr. King responded that it is a two step process; first the study is conducted and secondly they make improvements which are filed with the SPC, who then requests the improvements. Todd stated that the design of the offsite improvement costs had a line item within the budget. Dana Barnes inquired what the allowances were, with in the contract, for the environmental report. Mr. King responded $10,000. Mr. King informed the Committee that approximately 17 acres surveyed are contained within East Hampton. He stated a 2 acre parcel is the proposed 2^nd service road. He informed the Committee that a majority of the parcel is wetlands and wetland encroachment and would not be developable. He informed the Committee that that approximately 15 of the acres could be subdivided for development. Selectman Brad Parker informed the Committee the land with in East Hampton was not voted on in referendum. He stated the resolution specifically described the purchase of land within East Haddam. Mr. Barnes questioned where the service road would be located. Mr. Moss stated over intermittent waterway. Craig Parker questioned if the map shown to the voters delineated the land in East Hampton. Selectman Parker responded no. It was stated that the map did not show a town line. Mary Beth Mordecai questioned if it effected the service road location. Mr. Moss responded it would cross intermittent waterway, with steal pipes covered with stone for drainage purposes. John Gibson stated the Wetlands Commission routinely observes this practice. Mrs. Budzik inquired if a letter had been written to the Committee which could be posted on the web site in regards to the design process with regard to how codes and standards are established for the State of Connecticut. Mr. King responded affirmatively. It was stated that the letter could be used in Public Relations efforts. Mr. Moss stated the letter would be forwarded to Mr. Mazzotta and the Yale professor whom inquired about the School project. Public Relation efforts were discussed. Craig Parker stated that the more experts which are brought into a project can have a significant impact on the schedule. Mr. Barnes questioned if the project was on schedule. Mr. King and Mr. Moss responded affirmatively.

Mrs. Budzik stated that to follow-up on prior discussions regarding the Building Committee’s authority to handle the property negotiations directly, she reviewed the charge of the prior Building Committee, as well as the referendum, and found that the prior Building Committee also did not have the authority to negotiate for property directly and the authority to do so would have been that of the Board of Selectmen.

Property Acquisition

Motion by Mr. Barnes to go into Executive session at 7:25 p.m. inviting Selectman Brad Parker and Ruth Ziobron to attend, for purposes of discussing property acquisition. Seconded by Mrs. Budzik and passed unanimously.

Motion made by Mrs. Ziobron to come out of executive session at 7:50 p.m. Seconded by Mr. Barnes and passed unanimously.

No action was taken or decisions made.

Newfield Contract

Mr. Moss informed the Committee that Attorney Bennett was currently reviewing the Newfield contract. He stated Newfield Construction had an executable contract with the former Building Committee which was contrary to what this School Building Committee had been advised. Mr. Moss stated there are two methods of contracting; Construction Manager as an Administrator and Construction Manager as Contractor. A Construction Manager as an Administrator has the responsibility for scheduling, running and managing the project and would not hold the contract. The town would hold the contract. The Construction Manager as the Constructor is the General Contractor, bidding out the project and holds the Contractors responsible for the Subs for scheduling. He stated that the Construction Manager as the Constructor holds the Manager responsible for the project consequently taking on more risk. Mr. Barnes questioned how long it would take for new bids for a Construction Managers. Mr. Moss responded approximately 3 months. Mr. Barnes questioned if the old contract would be effective for this project. Mr. Moss responded that he was not exactly sure and that a Construction Manager needed to be in place by June or July. Mrs. Ziobron stated when Newfield Construction attended meetings; the School Building Committee was led to believe that there was no contract. Mr. Moss informed the Committee that he, Mrs. Budzik and Craig Parker would work on the contract using Attorney Bennett’s recommendations for Committee review. Craig Parker stated that the Committee should not be responsible with every single contract. He stated it is more efficient to have a contract in which the risk goes to the Contractor and that this method is more efficient for the Committee, Finance and Municipality. Bonding of Contractors was discussed.

Open Space Submission

It was decided to wait until the next meeting for the possible formation of a Sub-committee for the writing of the application for Open Space. Mr. Gibbs informed the Committee that Open Space proposals will require a tremendous amount of work.

New Business

Craig Parker with the assistance of Mr. Gibson volunteered to contact Connecticut Light and Power and initiate services in conjunction with the Architect. Craig Parker informed the Committee that other development activities in the area could expedite services. Committee Members agreed to wait for the next meeting to discuss potential Open Space Applications.

Determination of Next Meetings

The next regular scheduled meeting will be April 27, 2005 at 7:00 p.m. at the Nathan Hale High School – Room 117.

Other Discussion

Public Relation efforts were discussed. Mrs. Ziobron requested the consideration of starting future meetings later in the evening.

Adjournment

Motion by Ms. Mordecai at 8:20p.m. to adjourn. Seconded by Craig Parker and unanimously passed.

Respectfully submitted,

E. Ruth Ziobron

Filed at Selectman’s office

Attendance