School Committee: High School Construction Delivery Method - 2026-02-25

AI-generated summary. Written by gemini-3.6-flash from the transcript below, which is the record. It may be incomplete or wrong; it does not report votes. Every item links to the moment it began.

The committee voted to use the Construction Manager at Risk delivery method for the high school project and appointed district representatives to the evaluation committee.

2:50 Approval of Minutes — Approved the minutes from the previous meeting for submission to the MSBA.
4:17 Construction Delivery Method Presentation and Vote — Voted to proceed with the Construction Manager at Risk delivery method and authorized Left Field to submit the application to the Office of the Inspector General following a presentation comparing delivery options.
54:31 CM Evaluation Committee Appointments — Appointed Dr. Galussi, Jenny Graham, Ken Lord, Libby Brown, and Brian Hilliard as district representatives on the evaluation committee to select the construction manager.

[Member Jenny Graham]: Welcome everyone. The Medford Comprehensive High School Building Committee meeting will be held tonight at 6 p.m. via remote participation only. The meeting can be viewed on Medford Public Schools' YouTube channel through Medford Community Media on your local cable channel, which is Comcast 9, 8, or 22 and Verizon 43, 45, or 47. This meeting will be recorded and participants can log or call in by using the following Zoom meeting ID, which is 961-1987-9508. Well, why don't we go ahead and get started. Our first thing on the agenda is a roll call, so I'll call the roll. Jenny Graham. Yes, I'm here. Mayor Lungo-Koehn. Present. Dr. Galussi. Present. Marta Cabral here. Joan Bowen present. Ken Lord.

[Will Pipicelli]: She's here. I just made her a co-host. She should be good now.

[Member Jenny Graham]: Hi Libby. Thank you. Got it. I'm here. Marissa Desmond here. Maria Dorsey is absent. She let me know that she could not join us tonight. Brian Hilliard.

[Member Jenny Graham]: Emily Lazzaro also let me know that she is absent tonight. Paul Malone.

[Member Jenny Graham]: Phil Santos? I see Phil. Okay. And Lisa Miller? Here. Hi, Lisa. Hi. Okay. So we have 12 in the affirmative, three absent. We'll call the meeting to order. Um, the first item on the agenda is approval of our minutes from Monday night's meeting. Thank you, Will, for the very fast turnaround. Um, these minutes will be certified and they will, um, go to the MSBA with the submission that was sent in earlier today for our PDP. So, um, is there a motion to approve the minutes?

[Member Jenny Graham]: And Luke Preissner is absent. So that is 12 in the affirmative, zero in the negative, three absent. Minutes are approved. Okay, next item on the agenda is I'm going to turn it over to the left field team to talk about the options for how we will ultimately build said new something of Medford high, like exactly what it will be. But there's 2 options. 1 is. a process called Design-Bid-Build, and the other is called Construction Manager at Risk. So there's two different delivery methods, and they're going to tell us a little bit about both of those methods so that we can make some decisions about how we plan to proceed. So, Matt, I will turn it over to you.

[Matt Gulino]: Great. Thank you. Nice to see everybody again. I know we just met a couple days ago, so I appreciate all the time and dedication everyone is giving to this project. Uh, so this presentation, uh, between the two delivery methods, uh, like Jenny said, design bid, build and construction manager at risk, uh, is a presentation that we are required to give, uh, if, uh, so that the committee can, can select, uh, the most advantageous delivery method for this project. Uh, so we'll, I'll go through kind of the differences between the two and touch on some pros and cons, uh, of both, uh, and just kind of go, go through kind of each of these. Just a quick kind of history of it. It was Chapter 193 of the Acts of Resolve in 2004, which was also known as the public construction reform law that essentially separated these two delivery methods, Chapter 149, which is design, bid, build, or Chapter 149A, which is CM at risk.

and they went into effect in 2005. In order to proceed with Construction Manager at Risk, an application does need to be submitted to the OIG's office so that they can approve that delivery method as well. They really want to just make sure that the projects that are being delivered under Construction Manager at Risk kind of fall into the category that really deserves that delivery method, which is largely around complexity, size, and phasing. So starting with design bid build, this is really kind of the traditional approach for public construction.

The project is fully designed by the architects and engineers all the way through to the construction document phase. So you would not have any involvement from any general contractor until the documents actually go out to bid. So once the plans and documents are complete, bids are solicited from file trade contractors and general contractors at the same time. There is also a prequalification process that those contractors have to go through, very similar to what we've done for Hiring the OPM and the designer, you issue an RFQ, you confirm who is qualified to do a project of that size, and then there's a public bid opening.

With DesignBidBuild, the low responsive bidder is awarded the project. This is a lump sum, kind of closed book amount that we would see from each of the contractors. You do have to go with the low bid unless there is a reason for them to be disqualified if there's any bid protest or they don't provide all of the documentation that was required. So it is possible to kind of disqualify or not go with the low responsive bidder if that were to happen. It is fairly rare but can happen. The kind of one of the largest differences between the two is change orders. So the change orders for a DBB construction delivery method would be a final increase to the construction cost.

So overall, it's a fairly linear kind of process. You qualify firms. Uh, you issue the, the documents for the proposals, you receive the proposals, you, you open them all at the same time. Uh, and then, uh, like I said, you go with the lowest responsive, uh, bidder. Um, so on our timeframe, you know, we have, um, if the project were to pass in May, uh, we would be going into the detailed design, uh, in early 27.

And the construction documents would probably not be fully complete until it's generally about a year from the end of SD to when construction documents are prepared. So 2028 is when this project would be bid under a design bid build delivery method. The construction manager at risk procurement process is based on qualifications and fees. So kind of similar to the DBB process, you do have to go through a pre-qualification process to confirm that any of the general contractors or construction managers are qualified to do a project of this size and scope.

The biggest difference with CMR is that it allows you to bring on a construction manager much earlier in the process. Typically, they're brought on in the schematic design phase. This gives them the ability to provide design review, pre-construction services, and really kind of get into the logistics of the site. We would ask the construction manager at risk to provide a cost estimate. It's one of the first things that we would do starting in SD is have them work closely with the designer and work through a cost estimate. The construction managers obviously have a very close relationship with subcontractors, so they're a very good estimating tool. And given that it's the firm that would be building the project, you get a bit of efficiencies with how closely they can work with the designer and really get a good cost estimate at that point in time. We would still be doing cost estimates through the designer as well. So we would still be receiving two cost estimates. But the second one, rather than being through the OPM, would be the CM firm.

The CM will then, after the pre-construction services, will become the builder of the project. So again, their familiarity with the project is certainly one of the benefits. There is a trade prequalification process that goes along with construction manager at risk. There's about 40% of the bid packages that would still have to go through a publicly bid process. And that is handled very similarly to the design bid build, where the lowest responsive bidder would be awarded the contract.

The remaining contracts are all procured through the construction manager. So they have the ability to reach out to the firms that they have worked with before. Typically, they reach out to four to six firms, ask them to price the project. They provide them with leveling sheets to make sure that all firms are looking at the same information. They'll bring them in, do a final de-scope, and then ask those firms for best and final. But it gives the owner a bit of control in that subcontractor selection. The OPM and the designer and owner can certainly be involved in those, you know, in those discussions.

But it does help kind of give the owner a bit more control over some of those non-trade bid packages. Having a construction manager also allows you to release early bid packages. In the case of Medford High School, we would certainly be looking to release site work packages and kind of mobilization packages early, and most likely look to do early site work foundations in structural steel and really any other long lead time items can be discussed and put into an early bid package to kind of help with fast tracking the schedule and making sure that we're hitting all the key milestones.

The contract itself is called a Guaranteed Maximum Price, or a GMP, with OpenBook Accounting. will be executed when all of the major big bid packages are bid. There would not be, you know, a GMP per se for early bid packages, but there would be, you know, contract extensions from early release packages through the final procurement of all the other scopes before a guaranteed maximum price is reached. Change orders resulting from scope and unanticipated site conditions can still increase the final cost of construction, but the big advantage here is having that general contractor on board early with some of the site contractors to do additional surveying and kind of get ahead of some of the unforeseen, especially largely in site work. is where we see the majority of that.

So again, kind of gives you a little bit of a benefit to get ahead of some of that work. The key differences, and probably the easiest way to kind of look at this is for a construction manager at risk, you're selecting a firm based on their qualifications in hiring them. to manage the construction project, whereas with Design-Bid-Build, you're selecting the lowest pre-qualified builder and are purchasing a building through the specifications and the plans. So on here are some of the things that I kind of talked about previously. Obviously, up here at CM at Risk, the pre-construction services, starting and schematic design, is a big benefit to get the contractor on board early.

There is the flexibility to adjust either design or how certain packages are broken out if packages do come in high. It's less of a time constraint with design bid build if there are issues or if we were to get, let's say like electrical is a trade bid that would need to be publicly bid. If we were to get all electrical bids that were well over the anticipated budget, We would probably go out to bid. There would probably be some design review. But because of a very linear process, that hurts us on a schedule basis. Whereas with CM at risk, again, you have that flexibility with some of the trades to kind of pick and choose and use the CM's expertise to avoid some of those potential schedule delays.

CMI risk is also a much better management of changes because again they are on board early. They have buy in to the design and the phasing. So there's a bit more skin in the game for them to make sure that changes are kind of flushed out prior to construction. uh, whereas with design bid build again, you're being handed the documents and building off of those. So if there's anything that's unclear, um, or needs to be changed, uh, it would result, um, directly in a, in a owner change order.

I did see someone's hand go up. Um, I will pause for a quick second, just to answer some questions.

[Member Paul Ruseau]: Oh, thank you. Um, So with the design build and the effects on schedule, like in the example you used, we do the electrical and we're thinking it's going to be, I don't know, 50 million, but it comes in at 150 million and we have to go and be like, we got to do something here. All that time while we're figuring out what it is we're going to do, it's going to delay the project. And am I correct that The parts of the project that may have already been bid, like we've already decided, OK, we're going to use these folks for roofs. I'm just making stuff up. I'm assuming that the thing that they agree to is time sensitive. So if we need an extra six months, everybody who you've already picked in their amounts will go up because of inflation. Is that true?

[Matt Gulino]: It really depends on the length of the delay. I would say six months is pretty aggressive and very long. I don't, I wouldn't anticipate like a six month delay per se, but it could be a month, you know, like, you know, to kind of go back and look. So I wouldn't, unless it was like a very long delay, I wouldn't anticipate. the other contractors to say, hey, we need to rebid because it's been so long that pricing is totally different.

Escalation is typically carried and anticipated in bids. So unless there's a major, major schedule delay, I wouldn't say that that would happen. Again, it probably could, but I think that's a very severe kind of schedule delay issue and probably talking more about, you know, major, you know, design issues as opposed to, you know, just looking at maybe some of the phasing or, you know, some of the products potentially that are being used.

[Member Paul Ruseau]: Okay. And related to that, so, How does that, you know, in the example I just gave of, you know, we just decided electrical is going to cost $50 million, but the bids come in at $150 is the lowest. Let's say, well, we really can't do anything about it. It's just going to be $100 million more. Where does, or how does the MSBA fit into this conversation at this point?

[Matt Gulino]: So MSBA is still reimbursing. reimbursing based off of scope. They do have their cost caps for certain aspects of the building. We've kind of talked about a few of those, like increasing auditorium size from 750 seats to 1,000 seats.

[Member Paul Ruseau]: Now, is this that, you know, when we were in the earlier phases and attending the MSBA meetings, there was a, I think there were two high schools or schools where they had to agree to a new, bigger number because of inflation and for whatever other reasons. Is this one of those scenarios where like everybody here thinks it's, I'm just making it, it's going to be 800 million. And at the end of the day, it's 900. As a school building committee, we don't just get to make that decision and call it a day. So is this where MSBA has to chime in and be like, we are OK with that and vote it?

[Matt Gulino]: Yeah, I do think MSBA certainly would weigh in if there were major buyout issues and we were way off budget. I personally haven't gone through a scenario like that. So knock on wood, hopefully I don't. It's a good question. I don't have a great direct answer for you. I can certainly try to get some more information for you.

[Member Paul Ruseau]: But these are problems that are less Well, they're not necessarily less likely to have them, but they've been known so much earlier, right?

[Adele Sands]: It's Jen Carlson, but I'm calling in from the car. Can anyone hear me?

[Adele Sands]: Yes, sorry about that. I was trying to find the unmute button in the car. I just wanted to chime in that if there was some sort of significant overage that wasn't expected, there are avenues to pause, take a lot of scope out of a project or do some value management back to the Go back to bid, there is, it would definitely be a conversation with the MSBA if there was absolutely no way that we could get back to budget. I will add that there are so many checkpoints built into the process through Estimates and every step of the way, not just during this feasibility study, but once we get on to the other side of this, we'll have the design development estimate, and then a 60% CD construction document estimate, and then a 90%. And if this project does go CM at risk, it does give you a lot of insight what's happening in the market the whole time that we're planning and designing. So, I won't say it couldn't happen that we would be 100 million over in any instance, but I would say that it would be very closely tracked if you did have a partner on early throughout the project. And, you know, and I think having that partner as opposed to having that happen and then going to a design-to-build firm, it allows for going back to the drawing board with the builder as a partner as opposed to the design team, you know, deciding on some, to make some changes to the documents and putting it back out on the street to bid.

[Member Paul Ruseau]: Thank you. And I was just, I don't want to scare anybody. I was just using round numbers that I was thinking those, those numbers. But, you know, I, I, yeah, I, I guess I, you know, this design build versus CM at risk thing. I mean, When I think about the uncertainty of tariffs and inflation and all the other stuff, it just feels like design... I mean, obviously not somebody who's going to be bidding on this, but you'd have to bake in an awful lot of risk into your bid.

because you don't want to go bankrupt trying to build our high school. So that's why I personally have a strong feeling for CM at risk because we get all that earlier stuff. And am I also correct? I'm doing all the talking, sorry. Am I also correct that with the CM at risk, we can literally like order our steel and have it piled up somewhere rather than, you know, long before we would have even done the bid.

[Matt Gulino]: All right, I'll touch on a couple of kind of quick pros and cons. We've kind of touched on them just as the discussion has gone, but advantages for CM at risk. So again, selection on, based on qualifications, experience, and the proposed team, rather than the lowest price or bid. Design phase assistance with budgeting, site logistics, constructability review, kind of what we talked about earlier. Like Jen was just saying, the early cost estimates and feedback to help with the design.

This is another huge kind of benefit to the CMR. getting all of those estimates throughout the design phases. And again, they get a bit of buy-in to that design since they're assisting in its review. FastTrack's schedule and early release bids, again, that's another benefit that you do not get with DesignBidBuild. And then team concept with owner, OPM designer. Again, this is just more or less they're a part of the team. They have that early buy-in. They're brought on with the designer and the OPM to assist with the overall building project.

Design bid build advantages. It's overall a simpler process to manage. Again, it's a pretty linear kind of procurement method, and the results are kind of what they are from a bidding perspective. The scope itself, though, is already fully designed, and you're issuing fully developed construction documents, whereas with CM at Risk, You don't have those complete documents when they are brought on board. The owner and designer can completely control design. Again, this is just everything that the owner wants to include in the design is put in the designs, and that's what's sent out to bid, whereas with a CM, There may be some push and pull on the design, again, kind of depending on where price is tracking and schedule. So yes, there may be some more.

You may have the ability to kind of control the design and design bid build, but you don't have any of that kind of cross-checking prior to release of the documents. And simple accounting, again, it's a very kind of straight billing process. not an overly complicated kind of requisition and invoices from the general contractor. We did include here just kind of what the best suited projects are for each. So for construction manager at risk, projects that are time sensitive, challenging to define, or subject to potential changes.

They often require high construction oversight due to site logistics and phasing, and obviously the management of multiple stakeholders. For design-bid-build, typically our less complicated projects that are more budget sensitive, but are not as scheduled sensitive and aren't really subject to change. So, you know, a lot of design bid build projects are generally new construction projects, generally on the smaller side. There's just less concern and coordination with those projects and a bit easier to go with the design bid build procurement process.

Some of the disadvantages. So the CM at risk, you are required to have an OPM and a designer that understands the CM at risk process and the guarantee maximum price mechanics. This is really that OAG application proving that, you know, you do have a team here, both left field and SMA have done a ton of CM at risk projects. So that's certainly not a concern, but it is a factor. There is a perceived higher upfront cost due to pre-construction services.

So yes, CM at risk is generally a bit more pricey, but we have found that the difference and the delta between CM at risk and DBB isn't as large as people may assume. just because of having the ability to plan with the construction manager throughout the design processes, filling in the holes in the scope to make sure that some of the more simple change orders are caught prior to the packages being bid. The potential oppositional relationship When design intent is challenged, this is really just, you know, kind of a back and forth that often occurs between a designer and a construction manager, you know, just trying to figure out the best possible design in order to meet budget.

Just naturally, you know, difference of opinions can happen in having a construction manager on early can certainly highlight some of those challenges. Design bid build disadvantages, like I've been saying, linear process, which can equate to a longer schedule duration. Again, we don't have the advantage of getting any pre-early bid packages done. Hard price is not known until the bids are received. So again, this is just the bid opening day, you get the prices from your general contractor and your subcontractors and award to the lowest responsible bidder.

Minimal GC project management, this is just the management of general conditions. In the Construction Manager at Risk method, you have a very detailed list of general conditions that the construction managers required to put together in their bid. That's not really as detailed in design bid build, which can sometimes hurt in scope coordination. The designer may have limited ability to assess scheduling and cost ramifications as design is developed, which can lead to a more costly final product. Again, just not having a builder on board prior to the construction documents being released just gives the builder less time to review the documents, which gives the designer less time to assess any potential you know, design issues and scheduling ramifications.

Prone to changes and claims which may increase final project costs. Again, this is really kind of where that cost difference between CMR and design build becomes much closer together. You will experience a larger number of change orders on a design build process. Pretty much all changes are change orders to increase the overall project cost. But it's certainly one of the disadvantages for design bid build is kind of finding those changes as they come up and not really kind of being able to manage schedule as effectively.

[Mayor Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Question for you, Matt, before you go to the next slide. if I could to the chair. You talk about requires an OPM or owner with an understanding. And that kind of is my overall question, because we've had some success with CM at risk. I know, especially when we have people holding them accountable. So maybe talk about a little bit about left fields experience, and obviously how you would play a part in your team would play a part in holding CM at risk accountable and maybe it being beneficial for us? Sure.

[Matt Gulino]: So left field about 90% of left fields projects are construction manager at risk. Myself personally, I have only worked on construction manager at risk projects. So it's something that I am very familiar with. I know Jen Carlson and Linda on left field have also done numerous projects, CM at risk, and same from the design side. Matt Rice and the SMMA crew are certainly well versed in the CM at risk delivery method as well. So I think you bring a very strong team with your OPM and designer, having ample experience in the CMR process.

So we will certainly leverage the expertise that we have, not just with this immediate team, but with the rest of the left field personnel. I recently assisted in hiring a construction manager at risk down in East Bridgewater. So I just got through this process. So it's very fresh in my mind. And certainly, we'll have a lot of input as we start figure out how we want to put together the request for qualifications for this project. Every project is different. This project obviously being the size and scope and complexity that it is, we'll have to take a good look at what the qualifications for the CMs will be so that we're making sure that we are getting firms that know how to do projects of this scale. and not just bringing in firms that potentially haven't done projects this big before and kind of making it a bit more of a hassle for this team to make its way through qualifications and proposals.

[Adele Sands]: Can I add to that? As you were saying, Matt, one, it starts at the early stages of that RFQ, you know, making sure, like you said, making sure it's all in there. And then once the team is hired, if it is a CMR, The key is that they are a team member from the beginning. So making sure that we're setting up processes from the beginning that help get everyone on the same page, the level of trust I think that's built with a team mentality like that, it just allows you to holds all three of us firms, left field, SMA, and CM at risk. It allows everyone to be held to account throughout the whole process. So I think that is a benefit to having a CM at risk on the project. One thing I was also, I just remembered, I've personally worked on a project during COVID times that did, to Paul's example, come in, I think it was $50 billion over budget, which is like a gut-wrenching number to see. We did work with a CM at that time. The CM, the architect, and left field came up, got our heads together, and were able to eliminate scope that did not affect educational program that the SBC, the schools, and the town were all behind. And I could be wrong on the timeline, but we did get that project back out to bid within two months. And it did come in on budget the next time it went out to bid. So just an example of that, working as a team for something big like that can really help when everyone puts their heads together. Just wanted to add that.

[Member Jenny Graham]: Thank you, Jen. Matt, did you have additional slides before we open up for more questions?

[Matt Gulino]: Really just a high-level procurement process outline, and then we get into the current schedule, uh, if we were looking at CM at risk and kind of where that would land us at the moment. Um, and then, uh, I think that's pretty much it though. Um, so just quickly, the procurement processes between the two construction manager at risk, uh, is a two phase selection process. Uh, you issue the request for qualifications. Again, that's kind of what we were just talking about, making sure that all of the qualifications for this project are in that document so that we're receiving a statement of qualifications from responsible firms.

Once the firms are pre-qualified, you issue them the request for proposal. All of the firms that you pre-qualify uh, receive the RFP. Um, they can, uh, they submit their proposals. They, the, this is both, uh, just kind of the, the pretty glossy proposal as to why, you know, they are the firm to be selected. Uh, and then they submit a pricing proposal as well, uh, which will highlight, um, all of their, uh, services for pre-construction. and how they would plan to manage the project. It will include their fee, what they plan to carry for construction contingency. So those are really two critical documents during the RFP process. If firms submit a pricing proposal, you are required to interview them. So this is where kind of that RFQ and making sure we have our qualifications really spelled out. I have been on projects where they're a bit smaller and we got nine proposals and we had to interview nine firms and that's fairly difficult to kind of weed your way through. So we certainly want to make sure that we're not just throwing out an RFQ and getting a ton of proposals from firms that we know are likely not going to be able to do something of this size.

Once you interview the firms, the selection committee then deliberates and discusses which firm they would want to go with, and then you proceed into contract negotiation with your top selected firm. If negotiations were to fail, you can go on to the second firm. I don't find that to be a very common instance, but it is allowed if you are unable to come to terms with the first selected firm. The design bid build or general contractor is, again, a much more linear process. You do still go through a pre-qualifying process And then after you submit the documents to them, they price it. You get a lump sum from all of the subcontractors. And you have to take the lowest responsible bidder unless, again, there is something that would disqualify them at that time.

On the timeline real quick, if we were to proceed with CM at risk, it would allow left field to submit the application to the OIG's office in early March. The OIG has up to 90 days to review, which would put us around the May time frame, end of May, early June for receiving that approval. We are allowed to start to solicit qualifications before we receive the approval from the OIG. We just can't enter into contract before you receive that approval, so that gives us a bit more flexibility. Again, if we needed to pull the dates back, we certainly could. think based on where we are, we need to do that. But if that was something that we needed to do, we could certainly start to issue the RFQ earlier than late May, early June.

I would anticipate having the qualified firms notified by the end of June, which would allow them to submit their proposals. We would probably get the proposals right around the time of the MSBA Board of Directors meeting. I'm sorry, right around the time of our submission of the PSR in late June. And then we'll be able to hold the interviews in early July and have ample amount of time between July and the MSBA Board of Directors meeting in August, which would be our official kickoff of schematic design. in the MSBA's eyes. So we certainly have the time to do this, and we do have the flexibility to even expedite this a little bit further if needed.

Available feasibility funds, we just wanted to note on this, we will need to use some of the feasibility study other category. We currently have $280,000 in there. This would be uh, needed for at least the schematic design portion of pre-construction. Once the, if the project is approved in May of 27, then we would have the full funding of the project. to assist with the other pre-construction phases in DD and CD. So we certainly have ample amount of funds in our other category to support the schematic design portion of bringing a construction manager on.

[Adele Sands]: If I could just add if I sorry, if I could just add that. That other category, there are things that we do need to we will be meeting. Related to the design. Of the project that have been identified, so we will have a longer discussion about. That how much of that budget should be used for bringing on a CM if that is the decision of the committee.

[Member Jenny Graham]: Jen, can you say more about what these other things are, or can you be prepared to do that at the next meeting?

[Adele Sands]: Yes, absolutely for the next meeting. The other items are outlined in SMMA's contract. There are some things that we are taking a look at right now that will, some of those funds may be utilized for things like additional surveying or wetlands, additional But when surveying, sorry for the, I'm not sure if Helen is on, if you are able to, I am unfortunately still driving a couple of those.

[Kimberly Talbot]: Yeah, you're remembering correctly. I think the biggest 1 and we're starting to do some research on is the need for the geothermal test for, we know this committee is committed to looking into that system. And so. Having some initial meetings to see what grant programs are available to help alleviate pressure on the budget for that test for but Jen is right. You know, if we do end up exploring. additional access to the site, that's where the survey, where wetlands work would need to come in. So again, yes, there are some other outstanding items in the other category. We want to make sure we weigh appropriately with the need for a CM if that's the decision.

[Adele Sands]: And we will be ready to, we'll have that outlined more clearly in our next meeting.

[Member Jenny Graham]: Great. Are there other questions from the committee? Ken?

[Kenneth Lord]: I just wanted to ask if we have any concern about needing budget for potential additional exploration into contamination. I know there was some question in the PDP about some oil tanks and stuff out back in the past.

[Kimberly Talbot]: I can address that. So that ADS amendment that was approved a couple of meetings ago, that is the phase two that is happening right now, Ken. So that data is being collected as we speak.

[CAS00002491_SPEAKER_14]: Libby? I just wanna make sure I understand something you said, Matt. You said we could start with the selection process before the OIG gives us the approval. We just can't contract with anyone until then?

[CAS00002491_SPEAKER_14]: Is there like, sorry, was there like a risk that they wouldn't approve this? Or I mean, I'm sure there is a risk, but are we at major risk if we wanted to do that to save time or?

[Matt Gulino]: I don't think so. I mean, Of all the projects that I have done construction manager at risk on, there's maybe one that I'd say is maybe more complicated than Medford. The last two projects that I did construction manager at risk were approved no problem by the OAG's office and were much smaller, much simpler than this. So I think there's very little risk of them saying no. They have taken applications a bit more seriously over the last year or so. I think they were just getting kind of bombarded with a bunch of applications that weren't really filled out correctly. And people just didn't know really what they were doing. So they're really kind of taking more time with making sure that the OPM and the designer know what they're doing. And that's certainly not a concern here with the experience that Left Field and SMMA have.

[Member Jenny Graham]: Any other questions from the committee? Matt has graciously provided us a suggested vote language. If we are interested, if somebody is interested in making a motion to proceed with construction manager at risk and or design bid build. So I will ask if there are any motions to be made. Ken?

[Member Jenny Graham]: Luke Prisner is absent. So 13 in the affirmative, zero in the negative, two absent. Motion is approved. The next order of business is to approve left field to submit the application for CM at risk to the OIG. And Matt has graciously provided us some language here. Is there a motion on the floor to authorize left field to submit the application?

[Member Jenny Graham]: We voted to proceed with CM at risk. Oh, did we do them both at the same time? Sorry, I didn't, I missed that.

[Member Jenny Graham]: Okay. I stopped reading. I'm glad I'm in agreement with both of those things. Okay. Perfect. The next thing on our agenda was just a review of the schedule. We've actually already done that, but Matt, maybe you can pull that up real quick. Just so people have another visual of the, Of the schedule, and then why don't you leave the slide here? Matt the final thing that we have to do tonight is form the evaluation committee who will select the construction manager and.

MSBA requires certain representatives, including a representative from and left field. So we'll leave that to all of you to decide who those delegates are. Um, the, um, also requires at least 3 people from the district and commonly that's the superintendent and the chair of the. Building committee as well as some sort of. Chief operating officer in our, in our context, which would be Ken. Um. I would like to see us add 2 people to that so that Medford's voice in the decision of who we will partner with is Medford's voice. No offense to the folks from left field and estimate may, but I think it's critically important that Medford really be able to represent. So. I guess I will open that up to the committee if there are nominations.

So 2 things, 1 is to affirm the 3 proposed, which is Dr. Galusi, myself and Ken, as well as any additional nominations for participants in this process.

[Nicole Morell]: Jenny, it's Nicole. Hi, Nicole. Hi. I would move to nominate if they have the bandwidth, Libby Brown and Brian Hillier, just based on their professional experience and experience in this space.

[Member Jenny Graham]: Thanks, Nicole. Is there a second? I would second that too. With my fingers crossed. Um, so Brian and let me not to put you on the spot, but, um, I think we would like the committee probably would like to hear from both of you, whether you are able and willing to accept this assignment.

[Brian Hilliard]: I can jump in. Absolutely. I didn't want to nominate myself, but sounds good.

[CAS00002491_SPEAKER_14]: Yes, same. I'd be happy to jump in and imagine all the sense of the companies we'll be talking with. So this summer, I'm not traveling until August. So it sounds like we've got some time.

[Member Jenny Graham]: Are there other questions from the committee before we call the roll on this vote? Okay. I'll call the roll then. Jenny Graham. Yes. Mayor Lungo-Koehn. Yes. Dr. Galussi. Yes. Marta Cabral. Yes. John Bowen. Yes. Ken Lord.

[Member Jenny Graham]: And Luke Preissner is absent. So we have 12 in the affirmative, zero in the negative, three absent. Welcome to the evaluation committee, everybody. Sounds like we're going to be spending a lot of time together. So happy to have everybody on board and be moving forward with this really important step. Last thing for tonight is whether there is a motion to adjourn.

[Will Pipicelli]: Jenny, can I just ask a question real quick? Sure. The motion was just to add Brian and Libby to the evaluation committee or to approve everybody on the committee?

[Nicole Morell]: I mean, my motion was to just nominate those two. My understanding was that everything else was like de facto who had to be on that bus. I'm happy to adjust the motion if it needs to be different to reflect all of the committee being accepted.

[Member Jenny Graham]: Should we take a vote on the other Medford members just for safekeeping?

[Member Jenny Graham]: Okay. So we've already appointed Brian and Libby, so right now they're the only Medford people on the committee. Is there a motion to either accept or amend the other three folks that have been identified?

[Member Jenny Graham]: And Luke prisoner is absent. So 12 in the affirmative zero and the negative, uh, three absent motions approved. Thank you. Will for catching that I was, um, moving quickly because we're over time. So, uh, is there a motion to adjourn by mayor? Love to turn seconded by by Libby. I will call the roll one more time. Jenny Graham. Yes. Mayor Lungo-Koehn. Yes. Dr. Galusi. Yes. Marta Cabral. Yes. Joan Bowen. Yes. Ken Lord.

[Member Jenny Graham]: And Luke Preissner is absent. 12 in the affirmative, zero in the negative, three absent. Our meeting is adjourned. Have a good night, everyone. Thank you so much.

Jenny Graham total time: 11.56 minutes total words: 1410	Paul Ruseau total time: 3.55 minutes total words: 546	Breanna Lungo-Koehn total time: 0.61 minutes total words: 95	Nicole Morell total time: 0.46 minutes total words: 79