Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Systems And Sustainability Study topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
RSU 05 board authorizes up to $160,000 for combined systems and sustainability study
Summary
After a presentation from consultants Zeal Education Group and EDI, the RSU 05 board approved using capital-reserve funds to authorize up to $160,000 for a study combining operational efficiency and facilities planning. Board members pressed consultants on cost, timeline and expected savings.
The RSU 05 School Board on July 3 authorized the district to spend up to $160,000 from its capital reserve to commission a combined systems and sustainability study from Zeal Education Group working with EDI, an architecture firm.
Jeff Melendez, founder of Zeal Education Group, framed the work as a two-part investment: an operational-efficiency audit to identify staffing and process savings paired with facilities analysis by EDI to determine how buildings support modern teaching and learning. "We found 150 recommendations worth about $1.6 million worth of savings that could be reinvested," Melendez said, citing a prior engagement as an example of potential returns.
Board members pressed the consultants on the difference between aspirational design recommendations and near-term cost savings. "Where what is this investment that is going to save us down the road?" a board member said, asking whether the study would merely list additional expenditures or identify measurable efficiencies.
Consultants said the firm would produce analyses of staffing, programming and facilities, and that some recommendations could be implemented as lower-cost "pathfinder" projects to demonstrate value before major capital work. EDI architect Lewis Serot emphasized that the study would evaluate how well existing school buildings support a range of teaching models rather than focusing solely on roofs, HVAC or cosmetic upgrades.
The proposal has a history of shifting scope: the district previously discussed a $75,000 facilities study and later increased the scope to $100,000; Zeals finalist proposal to the board reflected a larger combined scope at roughly $150,000. During discussion, the consultants said travel and service fees were additional, and the board discussed a modest buffer for such expenses; a $10,000 contingency was suggested during the meeting.
Board members also discussed timing and stakeholder engagement. Several members urged caution about rushing community and teacher engagement over the summer, and consultants agreed that some elements of the work would be stronger once teachers returned in the fall.
At the motion point the board moved to authorize the additional funds. The motion to "expend up to an additional $60,000 for the systems and sustainability study for a total of $160,000, additional funds to come from the capital reserve" was moved and seconded (Colin; seconded by Valerie) and passed with no opposition.
Next steps identified during the meeting include finalizing a timeline and the consultants deliverables (the proposal lists final systems deliverables in the materials provided to the board), coordinating document sharing with district staff, and scheduling stakeholder engagement sessions. The district and consultants said detailed construction cost estimating would not be part of the initial study scope; if and when the district advances a design, discrete cost estimating would follow.
The board recorded the motion as approved and moved on to other agenda items.
