Facilities consultants defend $100,000 assessment as board members say they were sidelined

Haramman Associates presented a comprehensive facilities assessment to the RSU 60/MSAD 60 school board, detailing building conditions, program‑driven capacity calculations and a budgetary cost estimate that consultants said totals roughly $60 million for identified needs.

The firm’s lead presenter, Lisa Swin, an architect and principal at Aaron prek through 12 studio, told the board the study is intended as a “snapshot” to inform a five‑ to ten‑year capital improvement plan. “This gives you a comprehensive look at all the facilities,” Swin said, adding that the inventory identifies items by expected end of useful life and that not everything on the list must be done immediately.

Board members pressed for more involvement in the study process. One board member said the board paid about $100,000 for the assessment but had limited opportunity to review or influence options before a public presentation and follow‑up proposal were discussed. “We didn’t get any input as a board or really any opportunity to ask questions,” the board member said. The same member also recalled a prior budget choice to use designated reserves, saying that past fiscal actions shaped the district’s choices and heightened concern that the board lacked timely engagement in the assessment’s proposed options.

Haramman’s architects responded that the consultants had met with district building administration and stakeholder groups during walkthroughs and that the firm expected follow‑up questions after the February presentation. “We’re happy to meet with you guys anytime,” Jamie Wlette, an architect with the firm, said. The consultants explained that cost estimates are mid‑range budgetary figures based on historical and current Maine market conditions and that the district may realize lower costs through local vendor relationships.

The consultants also explained the firm’s use of ‘flex spaces’ in capacity calculations. A flex space is a room larger than about 600 square feet that could be repurposed (for example, a life‑skills or special‑education room) and therefore affects potential capacity depending on how programs are assigned across the district’s schools.

Board members asked whether the $60 million identification represents funds the district must spend immediately or whether it is a rolling need. Swin said the figure represents the total of identified items and timing depends on the board’s priorities: “You don’t have to do $60 million,” she said. The board asked for a clearer inventory of items already completed or in progress; administrators confirmed several HVAC and ventilation upgrades were under way and that the study has not been fully edited to reflect recent completions.

Members asked for additional scenario work — including an option for an intermediate (grades 4–6) geographically central facility and alternatives involving additions to existing schools — and a number of board members supported receiving more detailed information to compare costs and program impacts. Haramman said it can prepare additional options if the board supplies feedback and priorities.

The session closed with the consultants offering additional follow‑up meetings and the board asking staff to return with a cleaned‑up list of completed versus outstanding items. No formal motions or votes were recorded during the discussion.

Next step: Haramman and district staff said they will provide updated documentation that identifies completed work, clarifies the timing of items in the report and can be used to refine a five‑ to ten‑year capital improvement plan.