Town board votes to ask state to prioritize replacing aging community-building furnace

The board voted to ask the state program manager overseeing the Municipal Energy Resiliency Program (MERP) to prioritize replacing the community building’s aging furnace and to clarify how the remaining grant dollars could be used for weatherization and solar later.

Board members spent more than an hour reviewing bids and vendor proposals after local contractors returned prices that were higher than anticipated. A presenter summarizing the bid review recommended focusing on the MERP’s core goal of reducing energy use and operating costs, and deferring high-cost items added in later amendments — including the pellet-stove amendment, a $19,000 LED lighting and controls package, and some on-demand water‑heater work at the fire station — until state approval or additional funds are available.

Why it matters: the MERP award for the project is roughly $397,000 (as discussed by members), and the board was trying to balance completing shovel-ready work with preserving funds to address an identified, immediate risk: the municipal building’s primary heating plant was described in the energy assessment as “in poor condition,” and members expressed concern about old oil tanks, venting, insurance exposure and potential soil contamination.

Key details: members said vendor bids produced a pattern of higher costs than estimated when the application was prepared. The presenter recommended proceeding with certain vendor work now and reissuing RFPs for items outside a chosen vendor’s scope; Mountain/Mountaineer Air Systems was singled out as a relatively lower-cost bidder for the heat-pump/HVAC scope, while Catamount and Green Mountain Solar—after adjusting system size and applying the federal 30% direct-pay—submitted similar solar proposals (roughly $88,800–$88,900 after the credit, according to material reviewed by the board). One quote from the board’s technical lead summarized the approach as: “Let’s get some stuff done, build relationships with our partners, and protect the town from future energy costs.” That quotation was attributed in the meeting to a presenter who had led the bid review and recommendation.

Arguments and exchange: several members, including those who had reviewed the energy assessment and bids in detail, urged prioritizing replacement of the furnace and remediation of oil-tank venting because a furnace failure or fuel spill could create immediate safety, insurance and environmental liabilities. Other members emphasized the long-term energy savings and near-term tax‑payer benefits of solar and heat-pump installations, and raised the concern that delaying solar could miss current federal incentives (the board noted the end of a 30% direct-pay safe-harbor window). The board discussed blower-door tests and thermal imaging to better target weatherization before committing to certain envelope or window work.

Motion and next step: a board member moved that the board approach the state MERP program manager and ask that replacing the heat plant be placed as the town’s top priority and that the town present a prioritized plan for the remaining weatherization and solar items; the motion was seconded and approved by voice vote. The board also agreed to submit the SHPO historic-review form for solar to confirm any design or visibility constraints and to ask the state whether additional redistributed funds might become available for subsequent phases.

What’s next: a board member volunteered to meet with the state program staff in person to explain the town’s prioritized plan and to ask whether the state would accept a revised scope. The board recorded the vote and will return to contractor clarifications (for example, unit counts in heat-pump bids) before issuing contracts or reissuing RFPs.