Easthampton Public Schools Building Project Public Information Forum January 16, 2018

1. Easthampton Public Schools Building Project Public Information Forum January 16, 2018

2. Forum Agenda • Greeting – Nicole LaChapelle, Mayor • Cynthia Kwiecinski, School Committee Chair • Introduction – Thomas Brown, Chair School Building Committee • Program Overview– Nancy Follansbee, Superintendent • Annual Cost Efficiencies – Dayle Doiron, Director Business Services • Project Costs & Tax Impacts – Mel Overmoyer, Colliers Owner’s Project Manager • Project Plans – Bert Gardner, Project Architect • Caolo & Bieniek Associates • Commonly Asked Questions – Entire Panel • Forum Attendee Q&A

3. School Building Committee Thomas Brown, Chair David Mottor Nicole LaChapelle, Mayor Marin Goldstein Nancy Follansbee, Superintendent John Atwater Dayle Doiron, Director of Business Services Daniel Carey Melissa Zawadzki, City Treasurer Patrick Brough Cynthia Kwiecinski, School Committee Chair David Boyle Larry Carnes, Director of Maintenance Debora Lusnia Judith Averill, Principal Shannon Dunham

4. The Need • All 3 Elementary Schools are 100+ years old (Maple, Center, Pepin) • Antiquated mechanical systems • Inefficient and costly building shells leading to high utility costs • Limited outdoor play and learning space • Overcrowding • No room to expand the buildings • Inadequate parking • White Brook Middle School • 45 years old with failing building systems • Poor energy efficiency - largest consumer of electricity in City • Open classroom design provides poor educational environment • Existing buildings do not meet current standards • 21st century learning & teaching • Buildings do not comply with current building space standards and codes

5. Pursuing the MSBA Grant(Massachusetts School Building Authority) • Statements of Interest (SOI) submitted to MSBA for White Brook Middle School in 2012 and 2013 • Must focus on a single building project • Both years MSBA rejected Easthampton’s SOI for White Brook MS • Statements of Interest submitted to MSBA in 2014 • SOI’s submitted to improve White Brook MS, Maple, Pepin, & Center Schools • MSBA accepted SOI for only Maple • MSBA also allowed evaluation of consolidation strategy for grades Pre-K to 4 and Pre-K to 8

6. Visioning Participants • Mayor • School Department Administrators • Teachers • Students • Parents • Community Members

7. Educational Program Options • Options studied as mandated by MSBA • Maple Elementary School • Consolidation of Pre-K to Grade 4 • Consolidation of Pre-K to Grade 8 • Comparison of repair versus new construction • Key Criteria to Evaluate Options • Adequate Site • Temporary Classrooms • Barrier-Free Access • 21st Century Technology • 21st Century Teaching Environment • Quality Facilities for All Students • Supports District’s Educational Plan • Meets Long Term Needs

8. Why a Pre-K to Grade 8 Facility? • Equitable access to 21st century education • Full handicap access to educational program for all students • Reconfigures grade alignment to Pre-K to 5 and grades 6 to 8 • Eliminates moving students from school to school • Technology to support 21st century college and career readiness • Green spaces for science and nature studies, Phys. Ed., and gardens • Staff can be placed more effectively across grade levels • Resources to better support students with special needs • Facilitates community-building across all grade levels

9. Why a Pre-K to Grade 8 Facility? (continued) • Fewer transitions for students and families • Educational resources can be shared • Facilitates a strong continuum of curriculum and instruction • Provides opportunities for staff to collaborate and share ideas • Opportunities for older students to mentor younger students • Supports family and community engagement Pre-K to 8 • Improved parking and access, safety, food services • Improved instructional spaces for STEM, art, music, PE

10. Anticipated Operational Savings • Anticipated utility savings of $133,978 annually • Operational cost efficiencies • Food service • Preventative maintenance • Emergency repairs • Equipment redundancy • Snow removal • Staffing • Opportunity to reverse financial impact of CHOICE and Charter * FY 17 Cost to City CHOICE $1,070,763 Charter $ 941,209 $2,011,972 * Increased CHOICE revenue with completion of new high school ($633,264 in FY 17) • Eliminate costly building systems repairs (costs for FY 16 & FY 17) * Heating system repairs in excess of $120,000 * Elevator repairs in excess of $26,000 * Building masonry repairs in excess of $26,000

11. Existing White Brook Site N 41.226 Acres Bordered by forests streams and wetlands; Ideal learning environment

12. Buildable Area Wetlands Buffer Existing Football Field Riparian Zone Net Usable Site for New Facility Riparian Zone Existing WBMS Wetlands Buffer N • Environmental Restrictions: • Riparian Zones; east and west (dark blue) • Wetland Buffers; north, east and west (Buildable with additional Permitting) • City Restrictions: • Existing Middle School Building • Existing Football Field

13. Northwest Site Option: • Overlap occurs at Electrical Entrance and Boiler Room • Cost for Temporary Heat and Electrical Service estimated at $2.7m • Access to football field only around south side of WBMS Northwest Location Existing Football Field $$$ Existing WBMS N Site Access

14. Northwest Site Option: • Preserves Football Field • Construction area constrained and adjacent to WBMS Access. • Kitchen and Service zones at front of building • Loss of existing parking • Football field tucked behind school and uncomfortably close to 3-story wing • Reflects reaction to current issues rather than long term planning Northwest Alternate Location Existing Football Field Existing WBMS N Site Access

15. Northeast Location • Improved Constructability: • Does not require costly temporary conditions • Keeps Construction activity away from entrances for Improved Student Safety • Allows more space for Construction staging and material storage • Preserves current parking during construction Job Trailers Construction Entrance Construction Lay-Down Area Existing WBMS N Site Access

16. Preferred Solution Service Entrance • Building Organization: • 3-Story Middle School Wing • Central Public Zone contains Shared Program Spaces such as Gym and Nurse • 2-Story Elementary School Wing • Separate Entrances for each Age Group (Elementary and Middle School) • Service Entrance behind building • Ideal east-west orientation of classroom wings take advantage of Passive Solar strategies Kitchen/ Service MS Wing ES Wing MS Entrance Common Program/ Buffer Pre-K ES Entrance N Site Access

17. Site Plan/ Alt. Field Location • Relocated Football Field: • New Building and Athletic Field positioned to support sensible circulation strategies, ample parking capacities and retain open fields for recreational use. • Proposed field location large enough to accommodate a replacement football field and standard-sized track N

18. First Floor

19. Second Floor ROOF

20. Third Floor

21. Project Schedule New Pre-K to Grade 8 School New High School Schedule for Comparison

22. Preliminary Anticipated Tax Impact of New Pre-K to 8 School High End Preliminary Assumptions: • Total bond debt for Project of $61 million • 4% interest rate on bond funding • Range of bond term: 20 to 30 years • Options for determining annual debt service: • Flat principle payment plan • Flat total payment plan • Variable principle payment plan • Average Easthampton home assessment value of $228,400 • Preliminary tax impact range: $2.98 to $3.83 per $1,000 of assessed value Annual Tax Impact on Average Homeowner: $680 to $875

23. Cost Comparison: Repair Existing vs. Build New Pre-K to 8 Total Repairs Only Cost • Total Repair & Code Compliance Cost for all 4 schools (Maple ES, Center ES, Pepin ES & White Brook MS) estimated at $115 million • MSBA will participate in only one building project at a time. • Repairs do not provide facilities for a 21st century educational program • Repairs do not meet MSBA space standards • When or if MSBA will invite another (third) future Easthampton project is unknown therefore leaving 2 century-old elementary schools and White Brook unimproved New Pre-K to Grade 8 School Preliminary Project Cost • New Pre-K to grade 8 project estimated total cost is $109 Million • Anticipated net total cost to Easthampton for Pre-K to grade 8 project is $59 Million Delaying project will escalate cost • Project cost for EHS in 2013 was $43.7 million; project cost for the same school built in 2021 is $60 million (at 4% annual inflation)

24. Anticipated Benefits • Improvements to Teaching and Learning • Equity of opportunity – all Easthampton students to have access to a 21st century education • Aligns academic groupings with district curriculum – PK-5 (elementary) and 6-8 (middle school) • Full handicap accessibility for all students • State of the art facility for community use • Clustered and easily accessed recreational, performance, and dining spaces • Improved football field • Provisions for improved running track • Most cost effective solution over the long-term • Maximizes cost share by MSBA • Retains City financial resources for community use (CHOICE and Charter) • Addresses educational facility needs for a minimum of 50 years

25. Next Steps Submit Preferred Schematic Report to MSBA Meet with MSBA Facilities Assessment Committee MSBA Board approves Preferred Solution Public Forums Easthampton Public Vote Submit Schematic Design to MSBA MSBA Board approves Project Funding Agreement (PFA) February 21, 2018 March 14, 2018 April 10, 2018 March - May 2018 May 22, 2018 By July 11, 2018 August 29, 2018

26. Commonly Asked Questions • Are there enough classrooms for current enrollment & growth? • Will elementary & middle school students be riding buses together? • Will younger students & older students be mixed in a K-8 school? • Will CPA & Friends of Football funds have been wasted? • Why White Brook location for new school with poor soil conditions? • Will community have time to get information for a vote in May 2018?

27. Commonly Asked Questions (cont.) • How big will the new gymnasium be; how many basketball courts? • Why not make the new building smaller & convert Pepin to a middle school? • Were other options considered before deciding on PK-8 project? • Why was the siting changed to the football field so late in the process? • What is the timeline if the project voted down and how would costs change? • Will a traffic study be conducted?

28. Forum Attendee Questions