The most pressing topic was the feasibility study for the new elementary school, specifically the timeline and funding requirements. There was a consensus on the urgency to secure a placeholder on the warrant for the upcoming town meeting on November 14. Members discussed the need to establish a rough estimate for the feasibility study costs, which ranged from $1.2 to $1.4 million, with some discussions suggesting a higher figure of $1.6 million. One member emphasized the tight timeline for the 270-day period required for the feasibility study, expressing concerns about meeting deadlines as the next annual meeting approached.

To address these concerns, a motion was proposed to hold a special meeting before the warrant’s closure on September 23. This would ensure that a placeholder and possibly a rough estimate would be ready in time for the Finance Committee to review and for the warrant to be printed. There was also a suggestion to adjust the timing of regular meetings to accommodate the urgency of the situation, noting that waiting until the end of the month could be counterproductive.

The discussion also delved into the importance of public engagement and advocacy. Concerns were raised about the town’s demographics, with an older population potentially not in favor of school initiatives due to the absence of children in their households. However, it was argued that the town also has a young population that, although less visible in meetings, could be mobilized. The board emphasized the need to educate residents about the importance of town meetings and how they can participate, noting that many newcomers might not fully understand the town meeting process.

To facilitate public understanding, suggestions were made to create a video walkthrough of the current school building and utilize local cable channels and social media to reach a wider audience. There was a consensus on the need to present facts and data clearly, avoiding bias while allowing residents to form their own opinions. Open house events were proposed where residents could see firsthand the conditions of the school facilities, highlighting both the positive aspects and the issues such as the cramped cafeteria and maintenance problems.

Financial implications of the project were another major concern. Questions were raised about how tax increases would affect residents. It was proposed that breaking down costs into understandable figures, such as a 30-year note, could help residents see the project as an investment in the community’s future rather than merely an expense. A fact sheet summarizing key information, including potential costs and benefits, was suggested to be distributed to residents to alleviate concerns and provide clear information.

The role of children in advocating for school improvements was also discussed. Emphasis was placed on the real experiences of students, such as issues with temperature and space, which could resonate more powerfully with adults than traditional arguments. Additionally, a maintenance plan for the school was proposed, which would outline ongoing issues and justify the need for funding. Having a documented history of repairs and maintenance costs was highlighted as a means of informing future decisions and funding requests.

A key point of the meeting was the necessity of a vote for designer selection, with a suggestion that a boilerplate document could be adjusted for their needs. The timeline for appropriating funds for the feasibility study was discussed, with emphasis on upcoming deadlines for town meetings, specifically noting that the warrant would close on September 23 for the special meeting on November 14.