The committee’s primary discussion revolved around cost-cutting measures to bridge the gap between the project’s budget and available funding. One significant cost-saving measure considered was the relocation of the Town Administrator’s office to the North Wing, which was found impractical under current plans. Instead, the adoption of an open office layout was proposed, expected to save around $300,000. This design change would result in smaller offices for various departments, limiting future expansion possibilities. The balance between immediate cost savings and long-term space flexibility was a concern for the committee.

Attention then shifted to the COA offices, where the committee deliberated on minimizing the renovation scope. The proposal involved executing only essential abatement, demolition, and limited finishes for two classrooms and two restrooms, potentially saving $45,000. An additional $80,000 could be saved by omitting two single-user bathrooms, although this would restrict the building’s occupancy to 190 for business use and 400 for assembly, depending on its utilization. These considerations highlighted the ongoing struggle to maintain functionality while adhering to budget constraints.

Further reductions in the gym and cafeteria renovations were also discussed. Initial plans included abatement, lighting, and window work, with the removal of extra storage and a partition in the cafeteria, yielding potential savings of $77,000. Eliminating gym and cafeteria renovations entirely could save $1.7 million, along with an additional $44,000 from decreased site work due to reduced paving and parking needs. These options were weighed against the potential impact on the building’s utility and future renovation requirements.

In addition to cost-cutting strategies, the committee explored opportunities for securing grants to support the renovation project. A representative mentioned the arrival of a letter that could assist with grant applications, particularly state grants, distinguishing their role from a federal grant writer.

The committee was mindful of the implications of budget cuts and the necessity to avoid half measures that could lead to recurring issues. One member emphasized the importance of comprehensive renovations to prevent future expenditures, cautioning against “kicking a can down the road.” This sentiment was echoed in discussions about presenting two primary budget options to the select board: one at approximately $7.95 million and another around $10 million. The need for clarity and accuracy in budget proposals was stressed, with plans to verify calculations before finalizing presentations.

Ensuring that necessary systems could be installed without interior partitions was a key consideration for future functionality.