Motion to produce reimbursement ranges and benchmarks fails amid concerns about scope and timing
Loading...
Summary
A motion to ask consultants for reimbursement‑percentage ranges for each proposed space and a benchmarking table comparing Medford to Waltham and Somerville failed after consultants said the work is not typically done at the PDP stage and members cited MSBA timing, scope and cost concerns.
A proposal by committee member Luke Preisner to direct consultants to produce two artifacts — an augmented space summary showing expected reimbursement percentages by category and a benchmarking comparison with Waltham and Somerville — failed in a roll‑call vote at the Medford comprehensive high school building committee meeting.
Preisner argued the artifacts would help the committee assess how much of the proposed building would be reimbursable and identify potential outliers in proposed space sizes. He asked for "a best effort" range for reimbursement by category and a table that compared Medford's proposed spaces with those built in Waltham and Somerville.
Consultants and staff pushed back. Estimators and SMMA said MSBA reimbursement determinations are made line‑by‑line, depend on whether options are renovation or new construction, and are influenced by DESE approvals and incentive points; they said producing defensible reimbursement percentage ranges at PDP stage would be difficult and potentially misleading. Project staff and consultants also raised capacity and scope concerns, noting the work is not typically included in the PDP scope and could require substantial effort.
After debate about timing and whether the committee should wait for MSBA feedback following the PDP submission, the roll call vote failed: 1 in the affirmative, 9 in the negative, 5 absent. Committee chair Jenny Graham and consultants emphasized that the team will return with additional information after MSBA reviews the PDP and during the PSR phase when more definitive reimbursement guidance is possible.
The vote leaves the committee to rely on MSBA review and later PSR‑phase work for refined reimbursement estimates and benchmarking as the list of options is narrowed and more design detail becomes available.
