School officials weigh HVAC, security vestibules and E‑rate options as they pare capital warrant

Facilities staff and school committee members reviewed three options on March 25 to reduce a proposed facilities and capital warrant to roughly $3.0 million, prioritizing projects the district says are eligible for rebates and those tied to safety and student comfort.

Bob, speaking for facilities, told the committee that about $593,000 of the district’s network‑refresh request is E‑rate eligible and needs to be listed in the school warrant rather than under the town budget so the district can claim the approximately 50% E‑rate rebate: "there's approximately $593,000 worth of E‑rate eligible equipment," he said, and that separating school‑eligible items from town needs is "why mister D'Onizio didn't mind it being added to our warrant list, because there'll be an opportunity for [a] rebate." The whole network refresh was described as close to $4 million.

Committee members and staff walked through three options that trade off large items to meet the targeted dollar amount. Option 1 eliminates a high‑cost air‑conditioning project (identified in the materials as a roughly $753,000 item). Option 2 keeps some air conditioning but reduces the number of planned vestibules from two to one (vestibules were described as an important safety upgrade for Francis Wyman and Pine Glen). Option 3 shuffled several lower‑priority items to hit the budget target. A school official described the vestibules as new exterior construction that would create a double‑door “secure entry” area; facilities staff said construction could be phased and would likely take a few months per vestibule.

Other items discussed included a backup generator that could possibly be deferred another year with repairs (option 2 removes the generator), a district facilities audit (which staff said could be postponed a year), and a turf field replacement (about $150,000) that the town manager reportedly wants to treat as part of a town‑wide funding conversation rather than a single warrant line. Committee members emphasized safety: one member said from a "pure safety point of view, the vestibule wins," while others noted the importance of air conditioning for summer programs and student comfort.

Facilities staff committed to returning with a revised warrant that reflects the committee’s feedback. No formal vote on the capital warrant or any specific option was taken at the meeting.

Staff also noted schedule and phasing questions: some HVAC work would require multi‑year planning and some rooftop units (the auditorium unit was estimated at about $1.618 million) would represent a separate, larger phase. Construction during the school year would require temporary changes to entry and circulation at affected buildings, facilities staff said, and they would prioritize summer work where possible.

The discussion will continue at the next meeting; staff said they would try to present a version closer to the $2.9–3.0 million target after removing turf, the facilities audit and the generator from the current list.