A significant portion of the meeting revolved around the updated cost estimates for Phase One of the Marshall Park project, which have now exceeded the available budget. The commission learned that the remaining funds for construction were approximately $1,244,320, after accounting for expenses from the initially appropriated $259,000 and an additional $1 million in ARPA funds allocated by the Selectmen. However, the new cost estimate for Phase One was approximately $1,600,000.

Members expressed concerns about the financial constraints and highlighted the importance of precise accounting rather than relying on rounded estimates.

A point of contention emerged regarding the feasibility of requesting $5.2 million at the upcoming special town meeting, an amount initially estimated 18 months ago. The interim Town Manager advised against exceeding this figure, given the current budget constraints. However, the commission acknowledged that escalating costs might render this amount insufficient, particularly as some Phase One expenses were deferred to Phase Two, which could also face increased costs.

Concerns were also raised about the impact of shifting expenses from Phase One to Phase Two on grant commitments, especially the Land and Water Conservation Grant, which requires matching funds of $5.2 million for a $1 million grant dedicated to Phase Two work. Members highlighted the importance of clear communication with grant administrators and voters about the project’s financial realities and potential impacts.

The commission also discussed the broader context affecting the project, including market conditions and contractor availability. It was noted that many communities had delayed projects, leading to increased competition for contractors and higher bids. These factors further complicated the commission’s ability to make final decisions regarding the budget and project scope.

As the meeting progressed, the commission deliberated on proceeding with the $5.2 million request for the warrant article or considering alternative actions. Ultimately, a motion was made and seconded to move forward with the $5.2 million figure in the warrant article, which was unanimously approved by those present. The commission emphasized the need to remain flexible and open to adjustments as more information becomes available, recognizing that if the project scope needed to change, they could amend or withdraw the article.

The need for accurate cost estimates was underscored, particularly the goal of reducing the Phase One estimate to $1.24 million. The commission discussed the possibility of re-evaluating project elements included in Phase One that might be better suited for Phase Two, as a means of managing costs.

Attention turned to the design team’s upcoming meeting, with an expectation that a commission member would review the revised budget and communicate any queries to the design team. Ensuring all members were adequately informed and prepared for future decisions was deemed critical to the project’s success. This was vital given the complexities and financial implications involved.