A significant portion of the meeting was dedicated to the approval of the designer contract with AI3 Architects, a step in the school building project. The contract, which includes a $1 million fee for basic services and an allowance of $248,000 for additional consultant services, was the outcome of a comprehensive designer selection process. This process involved interviews and coordination between Left Field and AI3 Architects to review the proposed fee structure. Following a motion to recommend the contract to the select board for approval, the committee gave its unanimous consent after a brief discussion.

Julie Rivera from AI3 Architects introduced the firm, providing insights into their approach and philosophy. Emphasizing their extensive experience with educational projects, AI3 has completed 28 middle school projects over its 26-year history. AI3 plans to incorporate both active and passive security measures in collaboration with Edward Davis Company, the security consultant for the project. Additionally, the firm intends to engage with the community through visioning sessions, gathering input from stakeholders such as students, parents, and local businesses.

The project timeline was also a key focus, with the committee outlining the first phase in the MSBA process. The Preliminary Design Program (PDP) involves a critical 90-day information-gathering period, including visioning and programming sessions with staff and community members. The committee plans to hold monthly community input sessions in October, November, and December. These sessions aim to ensure ongoing communication and involvement from the community, which is essential for the project’s success.

In addition to community engagement, evaluations of existing school buildings will be conducted to assess architectural integrity and analyze grade configurations. The committee aims to determine the grade configuration by January, requiring consensus from both the school committee and the school building committee. Preliminary cost estimates related to the project’s size and scope will also be developed during this phase.

The meeting also addressed the scheduling of future meetings, with dates set for October 16, November 20, and December 18. There will be no meeting on October 2. The committee acknowledged the potential need for interim meetings due to the project’s swift pace and members’ other commitments. A leadership meeting is scheduled for the following week to discuss the education plan necessary for the project. This meeting will involve a team of approximately ten school-based individuals who will explore current program offerings and classroom space utilization.

The committee also discussed the launch of a project website, set to go live in late September or early October. This site will serve as a centralized platform for community members to access updates and resources. Ensuring that meeting dates align with critical project deadlines, such as the January vote on grade configuration, was deemed essential.

Finally, clarity was sought regarding the necessity of minutes for smaller internal meetings and visioning sessions. It was clarified that while formal minutes are not required for staff-only working groups, notes will be compiled for sharing with the larger committee. Visioning sessions will not require formal minutes, but there is an intention to work with local media to record or broadcast these sessions.