Building & Sites Committee Meeting
                              April 30, 2008

      The Building & Sites Committee met at the School Administration Offices on
Wednesday, April 30, at 7:00p.m. Present were Chairman Beaudry and Committee
Members Cote, Craig, Gelinas, and newly-appointed Member DeBlasi. Present from
Administration was Ms. DeFrancis, the Business Administrator.
      Chairman Beaudry presided and called the meeting to order. Chairman Beaudry
took the attendance because the Board Clerk was not present at the meeting. The meeting
was audio taped for later transcription by the clerk. There was no public forum.

    Comm. Gelinas made a motion to approve the minutes of the previous meeting.
Comm. Craig seconded the motion. The motion passed by unanimous vote.

School Building & Grounds Presentation
       Chairman Beaudry welcomed Mr. Adamakos, the principal of Memorial High
School, and Mr. Willis, the principal of Southside Middle School to review the status of
their buildings and school grounds and related issues.
       Mr. Willis said there are still some left-over items from the most recent renovations
at the school that need repair. There are some floor issues and other things and those
have been sent in as work orders. Overall, the majority of the items have been fixed.
They do have a few of the fire doors that they are still having problems with but the
company has been coming in and taking of the problems. There are still maybe 3 or 4
doors that have issues.
       He said “I would like to request a few items and these are things that I have
requested before in prior years. I would like to request an additional sink and an
electrical outlet for a cooking stove in the Family Consumer lab. The numbers are up for
that class. They‟re running 22 kids in a classroom so they need the extra space to spread
the kids out in the classroom a bit better to make things a bit safer for the teacher in that
room. The other request is when the renovations were done to the school they closed off
2 storage areas that are on the sides of the gymnasium. They were garage doors made of
metal that rolled up. Those were taken out. One of those rooms is still used by the PE
class and one has been taken over by the music program. That room used by PE is being
used as a weight room and they do yoga in it etc. There is no access immediately from
the gymnasium into that room and for people to get into it they have to walk out into the
hallway and come around by the cafeteria side to get into that room. We‟ve been
requesting a double door there. It would make easier access from the locker room and
the gymnasium to that room and it would make supervision for the teachers a lot easier if
they have the ability to stand in that doorway and watch the students in the classroom. It
is a safety issue as far as supervision. So that is a request that we would like to have.”

Building & Sites Committee                   1                              April 30, 2008
       Chairman Beaudry said “we did bring the door issue to the Joint Building
Committee to have that done. That Committee tabled it pretty much until we found out
how much money there was left in the contingency fund. There was the lawsuit going on
at the time and there were some expenditures and we didn‟t know what money there was
available. So that matter is still on the burner. Mr. Clougherty could probably answer
that better now that the lawsuit is over and he would know if there is any money left to do
the repairs to the doors. But that was something that was brought to the Joint
Committee.” He said “the principal before Mr. Willis wanted that area bricked up so we
paid to have it bricked and now we‟d have to pay to take it apart. There was concern
about doing it twice.”

        Mr. Adamakos said there are some issues at Memorial. First and foremost they are
pleased with the renovations and how things went at the school. He said they got an
additional 35,000 square feet to the building and they now have the proper spaces. But
there are issues that are left over. The most notable for him is the roof. He said “it
seems as though every place where they had to make an opening for the overhead units
we might have some leaks in some areas. The 500 wing still leaks on a regular basis
when it snows heavily or when it rains. We think it is because of the ductwork that goes
up through the roof and when they sealed around it they didn‟t do a complete job of
doing that.” Another concern that he has is with the mini gym. There is a unit on the
roof and they are now theorizing that every time it rains when people are not at school the
water comes in through that unit and it comes down onto the floor and the center of that
floor in the mini gym is all buckled. The thought is there is a mold or mildew problem
under the floor as it expands and contracts over time. Just this past week there was rain
and wind and the wind was having that roof unit sucking in the rain and bringing it down
to the floor. At night when nobody is around and especially during school vacation
weeks if it rains the rain comes in. So that is causing a serious problem in that mini gym.
We have to refer to Mr. Clougherty for them to actually look and see what it is but we
noticed it this week after the heavy rains that we had on Monday and Tuesday.
        There was water coming in through the ventilation also in the big gym. They are
wondering if the ventilation systems are sucking that water in similar to the McLaughlin
problem where the vents were so low and the snow went in and it trailed down. But
every once in a while Memorial has roof leaks. SkyLine comes in to repair but Mr.
Adamakos is concerned with the leaking.
        Chairman Beaudry said “we know what it can do with the buckling of the floor.
We just had several thousands of dollars‟ worth of damage over at Parkside because of a
leaky water fountain. Once it gets moldy under there it‟s a problem. I would think these
roofs have a warranty on them and the ductwork should be under warranty. Are they
going to take care of these floors now that they‟re buckling and if there is a mold
problem?” He asked Mr. Clougherty to come forward.
        Mr. Clougherty said “we are aware of the problem with the mini gym. Whether
it‟s under warranty or not really depends on the source of the issue. If it‟s coming in
through the ventilation unit it is not really a roofing problem or anything to do with the
roof itself. It‟s something that we want to look at one way or the other. We do believe
that it came in from somewhere above the wood floor. In the case of Parkside Middle
School, the water came in below the floor through a plumbing leak through an adjacent

Building & Sites Committee                  2                             April 30, 2008
chase. That turned out to be more of a pervasive problem. This one seems simpler to fix
because we think the water is coming from above. It is a sealed floor. At some point in
time it obviously penetrated that sealer, at least on the top because there is evidence of
growth on top of the wood. But it is sealed within the varnish or whatever type of
product that was used for finishing the gymnasium floor.” He said that yesterday there
was some driving rain so if there were some anomalies in some areas that they didn‟t
normally see rain they could write it off as wind-driven rain and say it was an extraneous
occurrence but that doesn‟t sound like the problem in the mini gym or in the 500 wing.”
        Chairman Beaudry asked “if it‟s ductwork that would still be under the people that
put the ductwork in, wouldn‟t it? Shouldn‟t they have put a damper or something to
prohibit rain water from coming down?” Mr. Clougherty said “definitely. There are rain
hoods that these units have.” He said “I‟m not convinced that it‟s being sucked into the
unit from rain hoods or anything like that. The units are on schedules which means that
after 6:00p.m. at night the units are off. And we do our best to shut them off during
school vacations and on weekends etc. to minimize the energy cost to the District. So the
sucking in of the air with the air pressure shouldn‟t be a situation when the school is
largely unoccupied. I‟m not saying that is not the case, you know sometimes we have
service people that will go up and override the automatic control system and the unit runs
all of the time. We would get an alarm but not all of the time when units are on all of the
time. But it is something that we are well aware of. A gentleman in my office is certified
to deal with hazardous material and mold growth and those things and Mr.Adamakos and
I have corresponded on the issue of the mini gym and we plan on tackling that over the
        Chairman Beaudry said “if there is water in the ductwork I‟m assuming you would
have to clean that out because there would be mold growth in the ductwork, right?” Mr.
Clougherty replied “we‟ll look at that.” Chairman Beaudry said “my question to you Mr.
Adamakos is is there a hazard where the floor is buckled. Can someone twist an ankle or
something?” Mr. Adamakos said “it‟s not that bad and the things that we are doing in
there are things like yoga classes and basketball instruction. But the basketball
instruction doesn‟t go the full length of the court so they‟re avoiding that area. So it
hasn‟t hindered our ability to use the floor during the day but it‟s still not right. We paid
good dollars for that floor and you walk over to it and see that it isn‟t right after just 2 or
3 years. But it hasn‟t hindered instruction.”
        Mr. Adamakos said he would refer to a few other small items. Of course the fire
doors are a big bugaboo for Memorial as well. Obviously when the Fire Department
comes in each fall and does their survey that is the one thing that they cite the school for
that it still has fire doors that have the electrical holders that are out of alignment or are
collapsing because they‟re plastic whereas prior to that they were metal ones in those
places. But when we gutted the building and redid all of the electrical work they replaced
the metal floor models with the plastic ones and they‟re just not aligned properly in a
number of places. And what happens is that over time they become loose and everything
else. So the fire doors really are a concern because that is what is keeping us from
getting a clean bill of health from the Fire Department and that is something that
obviously we want to have.
         There are a few electrical issues. He said “a thing that we can‟t change now but
when we had all of the wiring replaced they had conduit placed on the walls. They

Building & Sites Committee                    3                              April 30, 2008
basically ripped all of the wiring out of the school and put brand new wiring in. But what
happened is it was surface-mounted. The conduit in some places is surface mounted.
And it‟s sort of like taking all of the veins out of your body and replacing them with new
veins but it‟s all on the exterior. So if you bump into it with the carts or with the
scrubbers or anything it will knock the conduit right off of the wall and then of course
that has to be replaced. That is just a nuisance more than anything else. It is one of those
things that was part of the contract but when the wires used to be in the wall and now
they‟re in a conduit outside it is one of those things that is a nuisance. They‟re being
knocked down in classrooms with people moving around. There used to be only one plug
and now there are 3. So it‟s a nuisance item that shouldn‟t be. And it is a concern.”
       Mr. Adamakos said “the last thing is fit and finish. What I mean by that is
Memorial being one of the few schools in the District that is all drywall and not brick, as
you would see at Central and West, wherever you bump into something we have big kids
and we have big equipment that we move around so it‟s very easy to make holes in the
walls. The thing that concerns me the most is with the corners and where the doors are.
Those areas are susceptible to chipping and breaking and it‟s annoying to look at when
we‟ve spent over $5million on our building and you see these. That is the thing that
embarrasses me the most. You know, when we have an open house or something that
shows. What I‟m thinking is maybe using aluminum flashing on every one of the corners
or have something to protect the corners so they don‟t chip as much.” He said that he
was walking around the building just that day and there are some corners that will have to
be repaired this summer because from the regular use of 2,200 people walking around
they‟re in tough shape. He said “actually things look pretty good but it is a concern with
the way these corners look and it is a bit embarrassing with all of the corners chipped and
       Chairman Beaudry asked Mr. Clougherty “is there a possibility to have some of
those vinyl corner mouldings put on these corners?” Mr. Clougherty said “we could do
vinyl or plastic but the best would be what Mr. Adamakos mentioned, aluminum or
steel.” Chairman Beaudry said “plastic may crack if constantly hit and aluminum may
dent so that is why I was thinking of vinyl or something that would absorb the contact.”
Mr. Adamakos said “on a 90 degree angle I think it is less likely going to be a problem
because you‟re just putting it up against the wall or something but we need to protect all
of those corners. Again, as I said, Memorial is probably one of the only totally dry-
walled schools that we have in the District.” Mr. Clougherty agreed. Mr. Adamakos said
“we‟re more susceptible to chips and cracks and holes because of things being bumped
into or getting hit in the wrong way or whatever. The new construction has the cement-
base drywall but the older walls are the other kind of material.” Mr. Clougherty said
“there is a host of products out there. We can look at that. You mentioned that the new
section is holding up better than the old section with the fiberglass reinforcement.” Mr.
Adamakos said “I‟m noticing the corners get chippy but it‟s holding up better than the
original building.” Mr. Clougherty said “as far as the fire doors the Committee may be
aware that we are undertaking further measures to address core hardware issues. We
started with Southside and Hillside and a couple of other schools.” Chairman Beaudry
said “that‟s a Citywide problem. I know that Central has the same situation. They took
the nice metal ones out and they put the cheaper plastic ones in and they‟re not holding
up.” Mr. Clougherty said “the problem isn‟t so much with the product that they used but

Building & Sites Committee                   4                             April 30, 2008
it also is a function of the workmanship of the installation of the door hardware itself. A
door closure has a resistance built into it. It doesn‟t only serve the function of closing the
door but it also prevents you from opening a door too fast or with too much force so that
you‟re not knocking someone over on the other side. If that adjustment isn‟t made and it
is allowed to swing freely, fire doors shouldn‟t actually close unless you‟re doing a fire
drill or you have an accident or some actual event. So there is very little time that is
placed into the adjustment on such a closure in comparison to the front door of a school.
When you don‟t adjust that, it‟s called „back check‟, and the kids start using it and you
don‟t understand that as soon as it falls off there is 600 kids that walk through it 800
times a day for 5 minutes you know the force of that door getting slammed into that
plastic or metal or whatever type of closure you want to put on the floor, it‟s going to
break no matter what it is. I think that‟s really the source of the problem. We‟ve tested
the old style and we‟ve tested the new style and we‟ve tried adjusting the doors. We‟ve
got a solution and we‟re going to implement that solution.”
       Mr. Adamakos said “the last thing about fit and finish relates to the gym areas and
the grates or the coverings that are used over the fixtures. For example, the fire lights in
the gym have those coverings or grates and those are broken. And there used to be grates
over the exit signs leading to the hallway. Now there are no grates on any of the exit
signs. They are all plastic now and they used to be metal. Once a ball hits them they
have to replace the exit signs. That is another annoyance.” He said “when we had the
public hearing last Monday people were coming in and they pointed out the dented
covering over the fire strobe light in the big gym. I had to say it was because of the
quality of the material of the covering. We really need to put a more heavy-duty
covering over all of the high-priced items that we have in there because that‟s failed as
well. They look awful.”
       Chairman Beaudry said “again, that must have been on the spec but is there
something that can be done so these things are a little more student friendly.” Mr.
Adamakos said “you know things happen from balls being thrown and everything else
and just from the normal course of play when doing all of the events held in a gym. Now
we have more lights in there and more strobes and there are more things to protect so we
want to have a better quality item for protecting things.” Mr. Clougherty said “there
could be a higher quality material and it could be the workmanship as well. Sometimes if
you put a heavy-duty part in but it‟s not anchored properly it is still going to rip out of the
wall or deflect and dent and what have you. So I think it may be a combination of both.”
       Chairman Beaudry said “the District ends up getting a chargeback for all of these
things or it comes out of the Joint money which we have very little of. Is the City going
back after any of these contractors if there was inferior work, like with some of the door
closures that weren‟t aligned properly? That‟s an installment problem. So the people
that installed them, are you going to go back to them and say that they have to reinstall or
they have to reimburse us to have it done right. If there is something like these frames
that cover the emergency light that have been installed improperly, I‟d hate to see us
paying more money to have something done due to poor quality of workmanship.”
       Mr. Clougherty said “I think the project has been ongoing and we‟ve seen the
results of the project now for almost 4 years. We are aware of the door hardware issues.
We‟ve identified it and we‟re implementing a solution to that. As far as the wire guards
and some of the corner things I think those are pretty small dollar items that would

Building & Sites Committee                    5                              April 30, 2008
probably cost the District more money in legal costs to pursue to go after a contractor.
And not to mention the fact that we have an executed settlement agreement with the
contractor that was responsible for installation items along with monies that were
afforded to the City to implement strategies to address efficiencies.”
        Chairman Beaudry asked “do we have any retainage money hanging around that
we retained for the project?” Mr. Clougherty said “we have not fully paid out the dollars
that were agreed to under the settlement agreement. There are still some items that
Gilbane is working on and providing to the City. We‟re hopeful and we‟re actually
supposed to meet this week to review a submission from them and get the products that
we‟re looking for and get them final monies that are due them to settle the matter.”
        Mr. Adamakos said “one of the problems that we had Memorial was when we put
the sprinkler system in. We had to lower the ceiling height of a lot of the hallways by 6
inches or so. And we have exit signs that are hanging on these low hallway places.
Because they‟re hung so low, we have issues. For example, wherever a hallway joins at a
T, when they put the exit signs in originally I asked if they could put the exit signs on the
wall facing the hallway so people couldn‟t bump into it. Well, when they redid all of the
stuff they took the sign off and they had to put it according to code on a drop-ceiling
location which is now lower than it was when it was on the wall. That causes people to
bump into it and whatever. A good example of this is with the doorway that leads from
the cafeteria to the rear of the building there are doors that swing open. There is an exit
sign and the doors swing open and hit the exit sign every single time that the doors swing
because it is so low. I was wondering where we‟re having a lot of exit sign issues with
the ones hanging in the hallway could we hang them on the wall. Is that something we
could swap out or are we stuck with them according to code or could we change the sign
so it is not as large. It‟s becoming an issue.”
        Chairman Beaudry said “the sign size has to be by the square footage of the room.
You have to have so many square inches of visibility.” Mr. Adamakos said “as I said
earlier, when you have a T location, we used to have the exit sign on the wall so when
you walked down the hallway you could see the exit sign. Now they took it off of the
wall and it is dropped or hung where the T meets rather than being on the wall. Because
the ceilings are lower it makes it easier for someone to whack at it. So I was wondering
if those could be looked at.” Mr. Clougherty said “I‟m not familiar off the top of my
head with any products that would solve this as a solution but I‟m sure that they exist out
there. As far as the door hitting the exit sign I‟m sure that is not supposed to be installed
that way.” Mr. Adamakos said “I‟m talking about the door going from the cafeteria.
When they open the door it hits that exit sign every single time.” Mr. Clougherty said
“we could take out that door.”
        Mr. Adamakos said “so those are nuisance items but I wanted to bring them
        Chairman Beaudry thanked Mr. Adamakos and Mr. Willis along with Mr.
Clougherty. He said “I am still discouraged with some of the workmanship in our
schools. We spent $105million and people think this project was a savings grace but it
wasn‟t because there are still inefficiencies with the work that was done. I tell you, if
they did work like that in my house I wouldn‟t be too happy.”

Building & Sites Committee                   6                              April 30, 2008
City Service Invoices
        Ms. DeFrancis said there were several invoices this month that they are requesting
to forward on to the Finance Committee for payment. There are several from the
Facilities Division including the invoice from Aramark as well as other maintenance
projects that have been completed. She said she brought the actual bills to the meeting
but she did not make copies for the Committee. It is the new report that comes off of the
MaxiMo system that the Facilities Division recently installed. It is a very good report. It
lists the individual schools and the different buildings and the detail as far as how much
was labor, materials, and service. So it is a very good report to look at. Mr. Clougherty
said “we‟re going to be forwarding that on a monthly basis rather than quarterly for the
District to keep up to date.”
        Ms. DeFrancis said the Fire Department invoice was for $11,920 for user fees on
the fire alarm boxes. She said that she did hand out page 17 as that page was missing
from the agenda. On that page 17, Northwest was written in on the bottom. When the
invoice was printed that did not come out. And on page 18 there was another write-in as
well. It says Green Acres.
        From the Highway Department there are 2 small invoices. They‟re for the tractor
and for the maintenance they do on that annually. And the final invoice is for the Parks
& Rec Department for the grounds and maintenance for this past quarter. Ms. DeFrancis
said “it does appear as though we will be going over budget on that line item based on all
of the snow storms that we had this year.”
        Comm. Gelinas made a motion to approve the City Services invoices. Comm.
Craig seconded the motion.
        Comm. Craig asked “what does the $6,000 invoice represent on page 8?” Ms.
DeFrancis said that was for the maintenance chargebacks for all of the individual projects
that the Facilities Division did.” Comm. Craig asked “what does preventative
maintenance include? I see that the monthly fees include custodial and preventative
maintenance.” Mr. Clougherty asked “that is on the Aramark invoice?” Comm. Craig
agreed. Mr. Clougherty said “we have 2 technicians that go around from school to school
and their charge is changing filters for the HVAC units and greasing the units etc. It‟s
like changing the oil in your car. They‟re out there doing maintenance in order to keep
the units running for a prolonged period of time.” Comm. Craig asked “so it‟s a set fee
on a monthly basis?” Mr. Clougherty agreed.
        Mr. Clougherty said “there is one invoice included here for $247 that is included in
error. We weren‟t sending an invoice to the School District. We merely were forwarding
a copy of a bill for administrative purposes. It‟s on pages 14 and 15.” Ms. DeFrancis
said “so that is not to be paid.” Mr. Clougherty said “you‟re paying for it but it‟s in
another invoice. We were sending that at Mr. Puglisi‟s request.” Ms. DeFrancis said
“OK, I see. So we will take that off when it is forwarded to the Finance Committee.”
Comm. Craig asked “the fire alarm user fee, is that a fee paid on a monthly basis?” Ms.
DeFrancis said “no, that is paid annually.” Comm. Craig asked “is it one per school?
Bakersville is on here twice.” Chairman Beaudry said “Bakersville should only have one
box on it unless they put something in for the new wing of the kindergarten. Usually one
box is all they have on each school.” Comm. Cote said “there are 2 numbers.” Chairman
Beaudry said “if there are 2 box numbers they must have put in a box for the

Building & Sites Committee                   7                             April 30, 2008
kindergarten.” Comm. Craig asked “do we need that?” Chairman Beaudry said “the
boxes are how the alarms go into the building so they must have had to put a box out
there to have the alarm go in.” He asked Ms. DeFrancis to check on that. Comm. Craig
said “it says one is for the annex and one is the regular.” Mr. Clougherty said “I‟ll get
that information. The new addition doesn‟t have a box. The original building had a fire
alarm system and the Community Center; the one that was built around 1990.” Chairman
Beaudry said “that‟s the gym.” Mr. Clougherty said “that has its own system. When we
did the addition for the kindergarten I think that we may have paid to modify the system
for the gymnasium and added zones to accommodate not only the kindergarten but also
the existing buildings. I should be able to get that information for the Committee.” He
said “we should see the same thing for Hallsville and…” Chairman Beaudry said
“Central has a couple of buildings too.” Comm. Craig said “that‟s why I was surprised.
It doesn‟t indicate that but you would think that a larger school would have if Bakersville
does.” Mr. Clougherty said “the systems that Central, Memorial, West, Southside,
Hillside, Parkside, are all new systems and they have a master, sub-master type of
arrangement where there is one box.” Ms. DeFrancis said “it doesn‟t appear that all of
the schools are on these invoices. I could check last year‟s invoices. It could be that we
receive 2 invoices per year; one for some of the schools and one for the others. I‟m not
sure why they wouldn‟t give one bill at the beginning of the year.”
       Comm. Craig said “regarding the school grounds, things have gone up obviously
significantly. The plowing and sanding, is the plowing only for the parking lots etc.”
Ms. DeFrancis said “I believe so.” Comm. Craig said “so not for the streets.” Chairman
Beaudry said “the streets are plowed by the Highway Dept and our lots are plowed by
Parks & Rec.” Comm. Craig asked “we don‟t have to pay for plowing the streets in front
of the schools?” Chairman Beaudry said “no, and we don‟t pay for the sidewalks either.”
Mr. Clougherty agreed. Chairman Beaudry said “just for the parking of our students and
faculty.” Comm. Craig asked “how much over have we gone with this?” Ms. DeFrancis
said “I‟ll have to check. I will have that information for the Finance Committee
       Chairman Beaudry said “when I came in to sign the manifests I looked through
several of these things and I have several that I wanted to run by Mr. Clougherty. We‟re
paying for things and it seems like we have a lot of labor charges and individuals keep
coming back for the same situation and we‟re being charged for labor but not for
materials or anything. I‟m wondering why some of that has occurred.” He asked “at
Central did we do any roof work, it says copper design work falling off building. Is that
the old stuff? I know that we did some extensive roof work there. This is with the
Classical Building.” Mr. Clougherty said “it‟s definitely the Classical Building. We
have done work there. You saw some of the product at the last meeting when I handed
out some pictures that were associated with the roof drains.” Chairman Beaudry said
“but that‟s old stuff. That has nothing that was done during the design/build.” Mr.
Clougherty replied “no.” Chairman Beaudry said “OK.”
       He referred to a notation regarding door lock problems. He said “I thought at the
Classical Building we replaced all of the door locks. I know we had problems with some
of them. We were supposed to get someone to come in from another company to fix
what the first group came in and did.” Mr. Clougherty said “the door problems, I have
encouraged our faculty to call in work orders so that we can address any door problems

Building & Sites Committee                   8                            April 30, 2008
that exist out there. We‟ve done surveys. We‟ve had other people come back from
Gilbane sub-contractors. I‟m not sure exactly where that stands. Rather than sending an
individual out to do a survey of literally probably 3,000 doors, we have some information
and we‟re moving forward with that. But if there are door problems that we don‟t know
about I want to know about them. I ask people to please call in the work orders so that
we can correct them. You will see them on invoices like this. I‟ll be accounting for
        Chairman Beaudry said “right now if we OK this this evening we‟re going to be
paying every bill that is in this document.” Mr. Clougherty said that was correct.
Chairman Beaudry said “there are door problems at the Classical Building, door bottom
plates are cracking, all of that stuff was supposed to be brand new.” Mr. Clougherty said
“not necessarily.” Chairman Beaudry asked “in the Classical Building? They put in all
brand new floors in that building on every floor. Isn‟t that right?” Mr. Clougherty asked
“are we talking about floors or doors?” Chairman Beaudry said “this says floor entrance
bottom plate cracked. I‟m assuming it would be part of the floor.” Mr. Clougherty said
“I‟m not sure.” Chairman Beaudry said “and there is another one that says „Room 13, 2
or more floor tiles broken‟.” Is this something that would still be under warranty? I
know the warranty was only a year for the floors so from now on any broken tiles or tiles
that are falling apart, we‟re going to end up paying ourselves for those?” Mr. Clougherty
replied “yes.” Chairman Beaudry said “we still have a problem at the Classical Building
on the 2nd floor where the water damage was. Is that still ongoing? There was some
litigation with that or we were looking at possible litigation with that whole floor with the
problems we were having.”
        Mr. Clougherty said “the settlement agreement is the settlement agreement. That is
the City‟s remedy.” Chairman Beaudry said “so it‟s gone now. We own whatever is in
the Classical Building now.” Mr. Clougherty said that was correct. He said “if the
problems are significant enough where it would warrant a complete redo of the flooring,
I‟m happy to go over there and review it with you or with Mr. Rist, to gauge the level of
deficiencies that exist there and we‟d be happy to put some sort of program together to
address the deficiencies in total.” Chairman Beaudry said “I would like to see that.” He
said “I don‟t know how many of these we want to take off of the bill but there are at least
3 door lock problems and then there is the anchor of the lock. Is that the one that fell on
the young lady in the basement of the Classical Building? That was again inferior
workmanship where they didn‟t put in enough screws in the lockers.” Mr. Clougherty
said “again, the settlement agreement is the settlement agreement. If you would like me
to remove those from that invoice, I‟d have to look at them individually.” Chairman
Beaudry said “I don‟t know how we could do this tonight. If we don‟t have to pay for
some of this, this is General Fund money, then we could use it for something else. At
this point money is pretty tight so I‟d rather have this come out of the design/build project
if in fact it‟s either related to workmanship or whatever the reason the problem is.” Mr.
Clougherty said “why don‟t you approve it with the caveat that anything that can be
funded under the design/build will be funded under the design/build. When we meet at
the Joint Committee next week I can report as to what of those I feel are eligible.”
Chairman Beaudry said “OK, so if you don‟t mind we can sit down and go through
these.” Mr. Clougherty agreed.

Building & Sites Committee                   9                             April 30, 2008
        Chairman Beaudry said “the other thing I need some clarification on is we still
have a lot of heat problems in a lot of our schools. This one is with the James Building.
You know someone claimed that the gym was too hot and we got a bill of $554 for labor
and $334 for material. Then it says the gym was very cold so it cost $56.42 for someone
to come back because it was cold. Then there is another notation about a heat request and
there is a charge of $37. It seems like it was hot and someone came in and we had to
spend almost $900 and then a day later they came in and spent another $56 because it
was too cold. Then the same day there was a request about heat again. So, I don‟t know
who repairs our boilers and that but it seems if you look through this document there are
several times where it is too hot so someone is coming in and we‟re being charged
hundreds of dollars. Then within a day or two they‟re coming in because it‟s too cold.
We continue to keep getting bills. Also, there is a bunch of bills from Aramark for boiler
flame failure. There are 6 bills for boiler flame failures at Memorial and we‟re being
charged anywhere from as little as $65 to as much as $244 for this.” Mr. Clougherty
asked “what page is that on?” Chairman Beaudry said it was on page 14 of 119 pages.
Mr. Clougherty said “it‟s not in my packet.” Chairman Beaudry said “no, it‟s in the stuff
that you sent us. I won‟t belabor this but those are the type of questions I have. I‟ve
talked with Karen to let you know of some of the things that I‟m inquiring about. To me,
it doesn‟t seem prudent to have someone to come back 6 times for a boiler flame failure.
Either it should be fixed or not. I mean we‟re spending some big money; $244, $156,
$155, etc. At some point you could almost buy a new boiler.” Mr. Clougherty said “it is
a new boiler. That is part of the problem that I have with it. I have discussed this issue
with some of the folks in my office just last week. We‟re having a problem with the
boiler and we‟re not sure what it is. I don‟t know if it has been solved yet. We haven‟t
circled back but I spoke with the maintenance superintendent as well as the mechanical
superintendent on that issue specifically.” He said “as far as the James Building goes and
the $800 for a no heat call, something was fixed there. I‟m not familiar with every
invoice in there or with every work order but something was fixed.” Chairman Beaudry
said “they did buy a part.” Mr. Clougherty said “when we‟re talking about $50 or
something, someone probably came back.” Chairman Beaudry said “and pushed the re-
start button and left.” Mr. Clougherty said “no, not necessarily. If you have people
calling in work orders and it‟s 68 degrees one day and they say it is too cold and we send
someone and it is set at 68 and it is 68 degrees, you‟re going to pay for them to come out
to check it and say that it is running just fine. But it‟s set at 68 degrees. So they turn it
up and it‟s 72 degrees and then the next teacher comes in and says it is too hot. They call
in claiming that it is too hot. So the guy comes out and sees it is set at 72 degrees so he
turns it down to 68 degrees.” Chairman Beaudry said “correct me if I‟m wrong, we got
the list of the schools and I‟d have to go through the list but can‟t someone just pop the
computer up and look through the main office and see that the room is reading 68 degrees
and it is not too hot or not too cold. I don‟t know why someone has to go out and do a
visual if we‟re supposed to be having these new systems to cut costs and not create
someone‟s job to come out to visually check a thermostat.” Mr. Clougherty said “that is
the first line of defense. A lot of times we hear it is not 68 degrees in here. We‟ll tell
them that it says that is 68 degrees but we still have to go out. We‟re not going to make
everybody in every school happy. Those are some of the costlier issues that we have and
the more numerous issues. It‟s a matter of personal comfort but some think it is too hot

Building & Sites Committee                   10                             April 30, 2008
and others think it is too cold and it‟s those personal comfort issues that sometimes are
more bothersome.”
       Comm. Craig said “what we‟re talking about gets into what we talked about at the
last meeting in terms of putting a policy in place that controls the heat and the air
conditioning and the temperature. I think that is very important and I think that we need
to pursue that.” Chairman Beaudry said “hopefully that will be on the next agenda of the
Coordination Committee because they‟re the policy makers.”
       Chairman Beaudry asked Mr. Clougherty about ceiling tiles. He asked “I thought
that Aramark took care of ceiling tiles. I notice there is a fairly big cost on the replacing
of ceiling tiles. It was my understanding that that was Aramark‟s job to replace them.”
Mr. Clougherty said “Aramark replaces them. They pay for the labor and we pay for the
product.” Chairman Beaudry said “it says they needed 2 bundles of ceiling tiles and there
is a charge of $39.88 for labor and $98 for the material. Wouldn‟t the ceiling tiles be
delivered by the company that we buy them for and dropped off at the school where
they‟re needed?” Mr. Clougherty said “they might have had to be delivered or we had th
em in stock potentially because we do keep an inventory.” Chairman Beaudry said “it
says that 4 ceiling tiles needed replacing and it was $70 for labor to replace 4 ceiling tiles.
Who would do that if it‟s Aramark‟s job? This is at Memorial. They needed 12x12 tiles
and there‟s a charge for $39.88 for labor and $98 for the tiles. That must be for a box.
Then we have several bills to replace and have ceiling tile repair. It says there were
stained ceiling tiles that needed replacement. If Aramark is doing it then why are we
getting all of these charges to replace tiles?” Mr. Clougherty said “I‟m not sure what
each of those instances refer to. In some areas at Memorial there are ceilings where the
12x12 tiles are not a simple lay-in type of application so our guys would perform a repair
on it. I can certainly look at that and try to further enlighten you as to why the labor
charges are there. And it would enlighten myself.” He asked “these are all at
Memorial?” Chairman Beaudry said “yes, right now I‟m reading Memorial‟s bills.
There were 5 visits because a room was too hot each time. That totals about $700. Two
visits were on the same day, February 7. One was on Feb. 14 and the other was on March
7. Within a month they were there 5 times.” He said “I wrote a note to myself asking
what are they doing because there is no material cost and it‟s all labor costs. I don‟t
know what they could be doing to repair that for that kind of money for labor and there is
no materials.”
       Chairman Beaudry referred to the field houses. He said “I thought that the Athletic
budget takes care of the field houses.” Ms. DeFrancis said “I noticed that you had
marked a couple of athletics on here. Typically in the past this whole bill gets charged to
the regular General Fund and we don‟t split it out to the Athletic budget. I see there are a
couple of bills in there that you noted.” Chairman Beaudry said “I thought athletics paid
for their own buildings.” Ms. DeFrancis said “anything to do with the Facilities Division
would come through on this invoice. We‟ve never actually gone through this invoice and
said to charge this to athletics.”
       Mr. Clougherty said “Mr. Chairman, I‟m happy to sit down with you in our office
where I can pull up these…..” Chairman Beaudry said “I won‟t hold you any longer. I
just got my drift with some of these things because when I was looking at them I was
questioning.” Mr. Clougherty said “I think you have some very valid concerns. If I had
our data base in front of us I could pull out the technician‟s comments on what he did at

Building & Sites Committee                    11                             April 30, 2008
Memorial High School on x, y, z day and know exactly what happened the next time and
the next etc….”
       Chairman Beaudry said “and then too we‟re getting charged with replacing light
bulbs and they‟re fairly decent labor charges for replacing light bulbs.” Mr. Clougherty
said “it all depends where the light bulbs are located. Aramark will replace light bulbs
and it‟s pretty easy. Sometimes they‟re in gymnasiums or cafeterias and they‟re up
higher and we‟ve got to get a 1-ton truck with a trailer and a scissor lift and transport it
from one location to another. None of those things are free.” Chairman Beaudry said
“the one I was just reading says it was in the boys‟ bathroom and it says it needed one
light bulb and the charge was $45. I don‟t know if they replaced the whole light fixture
because I hope it wouldn‟t be to replace a bulb for $45.” Mr. Clougherty said “you need
to understand that the descriptions that are written in by the individual reporting the
problem and they‟re not necessarily accurate. They say they need a light bulb in the
bathroom and my guy gets there and because of the humidity or it‟s a boys‟ shower or
something like that the conduit has rotted out because of the steam from the past 15 years
or something like that. So the worker has to run new wire from the junction box to a new
fixture so it‟s $300 but you see the notation that they need a new light bulb. It‟s an
expensive light bulb then.”
       Chairman Beaudry asked that the motion that had been made earlier be withdrawn
and a new motion be made. This was done. Comm. Gelinas made a motion to
approve the City Service Invoices with the caveat that Chairman Beaudry would go
over them with Mr. Clougherty and any not belonging to the General Fund would
be sent over to the Joint Committee. Comm. Craig seconded the motion. The
motion passed by unanimous vote.
       Chairman Beaudry said “thank you Mr. Clougherty for your indulgence.”

Alarm Response Vendor Update
        Mr. Robidas came forward. Chairman Beaudry said what the Committee was
looking for was whether the vendor that has been being discussed was bonded and
whether the bonding was going to work. He said that he had talked with the Risk
Manager but he would ask Mr. Robidas to share the information he had received.
        Mr. Robidas said “I reviewed with the City‟s Risk Manager, Mr. Ntapolis, the
agreement that is contained within the contract that is being proposed by Day &
Zimerman which is doing business in our area under Reliable Security. He reviewed it
and he said that he had absolutely no problem with it. Those are exactly the criteria that
he requires on the contract as well. He felt very comfortable.” He said “and Day &
Zimmerman confirmed as well that this would indeed cover any loss of key etc. because
that would be negligence on their part. That is part of their indemnification. In addition
to that, as far as controlling the key, in speaking with Day & Zimmerman they also use a
Knox box in their supervisor‟s vehicle. So the key is not kept on a loose ring in a vehicle
but it is actually kept in a Knox box just like it would be with the Fire Department and
their district chief if you will. When they respond to a location they have to contact their
communication center for the release of the Knox box so they can access the key.”
        Chairman Beaudry said “the other question was a concern with broken windows
and who would have to come back to repair the windows. There were only 4 broken

Building & Sites Committee                   12                            April 30, 2008
windows out of the whole list that we‟ve had for the year so I don‟t think that is going to
be a major problem. We‟ve only had to have someone come back 4 times to repair a
        Mr. Robidas said “I also reviewed the service slips; the copies that I had. I have to
go by Mr. Clougherty‟s numbers. Quite frankly, these are the actual slips that he uses to
bill from. They usually forward me a copy of them and we‟re only a few places off.
Particularly looking at some of the questions that were raised at the last meeting with
broken windows, under the service slips that I have from the same time period of January
1 through December 31 of 2007 they indicate that they contacted the Facilities Division
to respond 3 times to repair a broken window.” Chairman Beaudry said “so we paid for it
anyway.” Mr. Robidas said “in some of those instances, we did. It doesn‟t indicate but
we did for one reason or another the responder from Aramark felt that he should have
someone from the Facilities Division respond for the broken window.”
        Chairman Beaudry asked Mr. Robidas to quickly go over the cost savings and the
cost analysis between the 2 groups. Mr. Robidas said “again, we were looking at an
average of 22 calls per month. That is what we had calculated an average at. The current
rate with Aramark is $45.90 per call. So if we broke that down, that was an average bill
of $1,000 per month which would equate to about $12,000. We‟re dealing with rough-
estimated numbers.” He said “if we utilize Reliable Security it would be $16 per
response. That covers the first hour. We‟re pretty sure that we‟d be covered by the first
hour. If we utilize the same number of calls, that would give us a cost of $3,724 with a
projected savings of $8,200 and change per year or about $8,300 less per year. There
was some additional cost about the bonding issue. Backing all of that out, we‟re dealing
strictly with the $16 for the first hour for the alarm response to have them as the first
responder to meet the Police Department. In essence, we calculated a savings of about
two thirds.”
        Chairman Beaudry asked “so what is their name now?” Mr. Robidas said “their
corporate name is Day & Zimmerman which is a multi-billion dollar corporation. They
operate internationally. Reliable Security is part of the umbrella of Day & Zimmerman.
This particular branch, Reliable Security, was a privately-owned company which Day &
Zimmerman had purchased and it is now part of the Day & Zimmerman corporation.”
Chairman Beaudry said “so if there is a motion to be made it would be with Day &
Zimmerman?” Mr. Robidas said “correct, it‟s Day & Zimmerman doing business as
Reliable Security.”
        Ms. DeFrancis asked “when we originally talked about this did we not talk about
having this on a 6-month trial basis?” Mr. Robidas said “we had originally talked about
that and we had also talked about a year and what the actual cost would be. So what the
agreement shows is a one year. If it goes up to the first anniversary date of the agreement
then it is subject to a 3.5% increase per year thereafter if we so agree to go forward.”
        Comm. Cote asked “where did this spreadsheet come from?” Mr. Robidas said it
came from Mr. Clougherty‟s office. Comm. Cote asked “am I reading correct that only
28 out of the roughly 170 were under 2 hours?” Mr. Clougherty said that was correct.
Comm. Cote said “so that means that the vast majority were over 2 hours.” Mr.
Clougherty said that was correct. Comm. Cote said “meaning if we went with the new
company the bulk of our charges would be $16 times at least 2 or probably 3 if they‟re
going over 2 hours.” He asked if that was correct. Mr. Robidas said “well, we know if

Building & Sites Committee                   13                             April 30, 2008
we go by alarm by alarm call there is a minimum 2-hour call back under the Aramark
agreement. So we know that generally, not specifically, but in researching things in the
past we know that generally if the police contact the Aramark responder the notation
usually says from the monitoring it was from 15-20 minutes for the response time. Then
they check the building and clear. I can tell you that the police aren‟t there generally 2
hours. They‟re there for a matter of minutes. They wait for the responder, check the
building, clear, secure, and leave. The only time they could possibly be there with the
individual that long is if they suspect there is someone in the building. If they suspect
there is someone in the building, quite frankly that is money well spent because we want
to make sure that the building is actually secure. So there have been a handful of times I
would say where we hit large facilities like Central particularly or West and even
Memorial if the police feel that there is someone in the building it could take them a
period of time to search the building because they do it with the dogs etc. But generally
speaking, they‟re in and out and police officers aren‟t going to be there for 2 hours.”
       Chairman Beaudry asked Comm. Cote to clarify what information he was reading.
Comm. Cote said “on page 32, the totals under the heading of under 2 hours the average
call there was a number of 28.” Chairman Beaudry said “correct me if I‟m wrong. What
that means is if there are multiple alarms within the 2 hours. Let‟s say that Memorial
comes in and Central comes in if it‟s within the 2 hours they‟re not going to bill us again.
He is billing us for the 2 hours so he will go and do Memorial and then he will go and do
Central and as long as it is within the 2 hours there is no additional charge. But where it
says „unknown‟ that could be just an hour. It could take him 10 minutes.”
       Comm. Craig asked “so what is the average length of a call? That was one of my
questions.” Chairman Beaudry said “that‟s not listed here.” Mr. Robidas said “to get the
average length of a call we‟d have to go call by call but the average length of a call is
much less than an hour. It‟s considerably less than an hour.” Chairman Beaudry said
“that first line would be free if you have more than one within the 2 hours.”
       Comm. Cote said “I know from the last meeting and you‟ve stated it many times
but we specifically asked for the average length because that was a crucial piece of
information. The savings that you‟re calculating is based on just $16 flat for every call.”
Mr. Robidas said that was correct. Comm. Cote said “I want to know for myself how
accurate that calculation is if maybe half or a quarter are over an hour or 2 hours. To me
that was a crucial piece of information and I know that we asked for that.” Chairman
Beaudry asked “can we get that information?” Mr. Robidas said “it can be done but it
will be very time consuming to do it because again it will be call by call. I can tell you
after 33 years of experience on both sides of the fence, the average response for an alarm
is not 2 hours. It is nowhere near 2 hours. They‟re in and they‟re out. If you‟re there 45
minutes, you‟re there for a long time when the police respond. Again, the first responder
is responding to meet the police. They go and they say that the building is secure and
they‟re satisfied so they reset the alarm and then they leave. The Police Dept does not
have time to have people there 2 hours. With that in mind, it doesn‟t take 2 hours to
respond and reset the alarms. Again, I can tell you from my own experience that they‟re
in and out of there in much less than an hour. They just do not have the time or the
personnel to commit to being around that long.”
       Comm. DeBlasi said “I want absolute clarification that in your 33 years of
experience, the vast majority of these calls from response time to checking the building

Building & Sites Committee                   14                            April 30, 2008
and clearing fall under an hour.” Mr. Robidas replied “yes.” He said “the only time that
they really have to check the entire building, per se, is if they‟re having multiple alarms.
If they‟re having multiple alarms it is usually an indication that there is movement going
on within the building. To give a little history, each individual sensor has an adjustable
unit. So each zone is assigned a specific location. When an alarm activates it may say
zone 103 but it is Room 105. They‟re not going to check the entire building unless they
have multiples. They‟re going to go into Room 105 and look at the sensor and see if
there is any particular reason or if there is anything around the building that would cause
that alarm to go off. If they see it‟s clear then they reset the alarm and they leave. Now
sometimes it is a bad sensor. Those things do happen. If it happens multiple times then
we have instructed Aramark and we would give those same instructions to Reliable
Security that there is a mechanism that they can utilize through our monitoring company
to put the particular trouble zone on what we call a „test pattern‟ so we can have it
serviced. So it is virtually taken out of service for overnight or for over a weekend until
we can address the issue so that we don‟t pay repetitive calls.”
       Comm. DeBlasi asked “and the $16 per call for one hour, would it be then a
continual $16 per hour rate and is it capped at any length of hours?” Mr. Robidas said
“no, it‟s $16 per hour thereafter. For example, if they did show for one of the broken
windows, the security officer would then utilize the 24-hour contact number for Mr.
Clougherty‟s office and they would wait for their responder to show up and when their
responder would show up they have their own access code so they would leave the
premises to them at that time.”
       Chairman Beaudry said “if it is the wish of the Committee to do this on a trial basis
we can look at Day & Zimmerman for a one-year period and then take another look at it
after a year to see if we actually had any cost savings and see if they did a good job and
we could make any changes at that point. An $8,200 savings, to me, it‟s worth a try.”
       Ms. DeFrancis asked Mr. Clougherty if he had any other concerns regarding this.
She said “I know the broken windows was a concern where the Facilities Division would
have to get involved. Were there any other things that maybe we‟re not thinking about in
going with this other vendor?”
       Mr. Clougherty said “if the District is comfortable with the provider and you‟re
confident that the due diligence that should have been done has been done and you‟re
confident that the qualifications of the personnel that are going to be responding are up to
the standards that you would want to leave your buildings in then I don‟t have any
objection. I consider it a major responsibility to have someone responding to alarms and
allowing them access to the facilities whether it‟s an elementary school or a middle
school or an athletic facility. You‟ve heard my opinion before. I don‟t have any vested
interest in these services. It‟s not something that we enjoy administering. You know it‟s
really a pass-through for our Division. It‟s not maintenance work or construction. That‟s
our passion. My only concern and it continues to be my only concern is the safekeeping
of the buildings. You‟ve heard my opinion before and it is my opinion now that the
services that you‟re getting are cost effective. I don‟t think Aramark is asking for a lot.
They‟ve shown us that they make 24 cents or 26 cents or whatever on each call and
they‟ve done a good job. We talk about $1,000 a month. Every penny is real and I
understand the position that the District is in but I just caution to make sure that you‟re
making the right decision. In the same vein, when you look at the spreadsheet that I

Building & Sites Committee                  15                             April 30, 2008
provided on page 32 and you look at the cause of the alarms, 140 out of 315 alarms are
unknown. That is where you‟re paying 2 hours for whatever that rate is. And 93 of them
are from school personnel, coaches, or events. That is close to 33% that could be
eliminated. With the unknowns, obviously I don‟t know what those are. I really don‟t
know what the cause of those could be. But there are 315 alarms here. I think you
should look at cutting down on the number of alarms, just the quantity itself as well as
looking at the cost. I think that would be prudent.”
       Chairman Beaudry said “again, this Committee had made a motion to start looking
at charging coaches and faculty members for multiple alarms. There are some coaches
that consistently trigger these alarms and it‟s costing us $44 every time this happens. The
District has not yet followed through with that.” Ms. DeFrancis said “I‟m not sure that
the Committee actually took a vote on that. It was something that we had brought
forward to the Committee that we were looking into charging $50 per call. But I don‟t
think there was ever a vote taken on that.” Chairman Beaudry said “then that is another
thing that this Committee could look at. I wouldn‟t mind making a motion this evening
to give a grace period, not the first time that they do it, but after 2 or 3 calls by the same
coach they‟d get charged for it.”
       Mr. Robidas said “that was another issue I was going to address afterwards. Since
we went down there, I fully agree with what Mr. Clougherty is saying. We need to
address the false alarms. That is really where the cost is going. The unknowns could be
for a variety of reasons. Again, the responder, they‟re not technicians so they don‟t know
what caused the particular alarm. They‟re there to look to make sure that the building is
as secure as possible that evening and then they leave. Sometimes we see multiple
alarms come in and there is an indication that there is a problem with the sensor so then
we remove the sensor from service until we have it repaired. Again, as Mr. Clougherty
said, the school personnel or coaches or events amount to 93. Now, there was a memo
that was issued by Dr. Ludwell previously because I know there were a lot of coaches
and faculty members who approached me personally about a year or a year and a half ago
that they were very upset that a fee was going to start to be implemented. I don‟t know
what the District‟s position is and being able to enforce that and whether they can or
cannot. But, if the District was so inclined to develop some type of a policy, I would be
more than happy to assist in developing some type of a policy. The coaches and/or
events amount to 43 themselves. I would recommend if possible that the District include
some type of language in their event contracts that whoever is renting the facility they are
responsible for the alarm and not only the cost of the alarm but the administrative cost to
the District for processing would be included as part of those contracts. Again, the goal
is to reduce the number of the alarms and not to just save the money. That is where the
real cost savings are going to be, in the reducing the number of alarms.”
       Chairman Beaudry asked Ms. DeFrancis to send this matter to the Coordination
Committee and let the Committee know that Mr. Robidas is willing to work on
developing a policy and would be willing to come to a meeting. Mr. Robidas said “in the
past I recall that as we going the calls each month we were trying to determine who the
last person in the building was because of open windows etc. Open windows in and of
themselves do not trigger the alarms. So if you see the notation of an open window here
those are actual calls that come from the Police Dept when in checking the facility
overnight or on a weekend they find an open window they contact dispatch. Then

Building & Sites Committee                   16                             April 30, 2008
dispatch gets ahold of the contact person and they have the first responder come because
there is an open window. So the window itself is not causing the alarm but it is the
window being left open. So if we can get the information we need to follow up
aggressively to find out who was the last person in the building. Now some of the issues
we ran across was the finger-pointing when we started looking at those. People were
saying that they were the last person in but they left and they were responsible but maybe
someone else came in after them or someone may have been in a different wing or in a
different building. Since they were on the campus it would be their responsibility. So
there were issues that came out of enforcing that type of policy.”
       Chairman Beaudry said “we are getting a little bit better because I remember a lot
of teachers were hanging windmills and that type of thing but now they at least are
hanging them in the right place so they‟re not triggering the alarms.” Mr. Robidas said
“right, and each fall as we approach the heating season I send a reminder to the principals
asking them to advise the faculty. The heating and the ventilation systems are
programmed to activate before people arrive and that has been causing some alarms.
And that has gotten much better. When it does occur I can tell you that the principals are
very responsive when I go and check and find these devices because we‟ve had alarms.
They‟re very aggressive and most times they‟re not happy. It could be in part because
they don‟t want to shed light on their school because of situations like that so they‟ve
become very proactive when things are brought to their attention.”
       Chairman Beaudry said “I noticed that in one of our schools we had some animal
infestation. Would that set off an alarm?” Mr. Robidas replied “yes.” He said “quite
frankly, we need to get a handle on the senior schools because that is where the bulk of
our alarms are occurring, in the high schools. The weekends when there are activities
going on etc. That is by far the bulk of our alarms and if we could get a handle on those
areas it would be good.” Chairman Beaudry said “we can send this to the Coordination
Committee. The question is do we want to have a trial period with Day & Zimmerman?”
Ms. DeFrancis asked “did we get references from Reliable Security?” Mr. Robidas said
“I didn‟t ask them for references because we utilize them ourselves. And I have spoken
with the Manchester Airport security manager because they‟ve been had a contract with
the airport for 7 years. The airport is going through another bid process as they are
required to do and Reliable Security is on their final bidder list under their pre-
qualifications. The security manager has related to me personally and they said they have
been very pleased with their service that they have been receiving from them.”
       Chairman Beaudry said “a question that I have is if the vote this evening is to go
with Day & Zimmerman would you be willing to work with the Administration on a
contract? I would like to see an out clause. We‟re going to give a year trial period but if
things aren‟t going very well in the first 30 or 90 days and we see a problem we should
have some way to get out of this thing before we go the whole year.” Mr. Robidas said
“yes, and that was going to be another recommendation. I would sit down with the
Administration and work on that. I have some standard language that I put in all of my
contracts which basically turns out to be a 2-way escape clause. Obviously I try to put a
one-way escape clause in all of our contracts but there are a few modifications of that
type of thing that I like to put in our contracts. I haven‟t sat down with Day &
Zimmerman to go over the negotiation process because I had to get to this point. I would
ask that the motion be subject to the approval of the Administration with a signed

Building & Sites Committee                  17                            April 30, 2008
contract that is satisfactory to both the District and Reliable Security before we proceed.
I don‟t think we should make a change next week. More probable is we target this for
July 1 and that would give us the time to negotiate the particulars of the contract subject
to the approval of the District.”
       Comm. Cote said “maybe the motion should be to enter into negotiations with
Day & Zimmerman.” Chairman Beaudry said “so the Administration would enter into
negotiations with Day & Zimmerman for a contractual agreement. And Mr. Robidas
would come back at our June meeting with an agreement.” Mr. Robidas asked “so would
you be looking at the first of July in conjunction with the new fiscal year?” Ms.
DeFrancis said “it would go to the Building & Sites Committee at the end of June and it
would have to go before the Finance Committee before going to the Full Board and that
wouldn‟t take place until the second week in July.” Chairman Beaudry said “so August
would be the earliest. Maybe we need to do this at the May meeting then it could be a
July start time.” Mr. Robidas said he had no problem with having this for the May
meeting and if he needed to go beyond he would work with Ms. DeFrancis.
       Comm. Gelinas asked “so in the first year we‟re saving $8,300?” Mr. Robidas said
“approximately. I‟m dealing with averages.” Comm. Gelinas said “based on the
comparison with the company that we‟re doing business with now, what would that
reflect in the 2nd year?” Mr. Robidas said “the contract the way it reads now, it would be
a 3.5% increase.” Comm. Gelinas asked “what does that come out to in dollars?” Mr.
Robidas said “about $1 and change per call.” Comm. Gelinas asked “and what the
current company be charging a year from now?” Mr. Clougherty said “it starts with the
same CPI as the contract which is 3.2%. So you would be saving just a little bit less.”
Comm. Gelinas said “so the savings with the new company would be minimal compared
to the company that we‟re doing business now in the second year.” Mr. Robidas said
“the increase is basically the same.”
       Comm. Craig asked “do they work with any other school districts?” Mr. Robidas
said “yes, but I believe they‟re in MA. I think one is in Quincy.”
       Chairman Beaudry asked if there was a second to the motion made by Comm.
Cote. Comm. DeBlasi seconded the motion. The motion passed by unanimous vote.

Questions from March 24, 2008 Meeting
       Ms. DeFrancis said there were a couple of items brought up at the last meeting that
Mr. Clougherty provided some information for. One item was the analysis on the alarm
charges. Mr. Clougherty said there were questions relative to the percentage of heating
control systems that we have that are tied to our energy management system versus
locally controlled with conventional thematic or electric thermostats. The report may be
hard to read but he would provide a bit of information. EMS is an energy management
system and it is a system that allows them to monitor temperatures remotely. It is a
computer-based type of heating system or control system. Local control is walking up to
a thermostat to change it. Typically energy-management system thermostats, we have
limited the ability for users to change the settings, for obvious reasons, keeping control of
the heat and the air conditioning during the summer for energy saving purposes. He said
“we have however allowed local control in some instances, we have too many complaints
as Comm. Beaudry was talking about. If a service tech has got to respond over and over
or we‟re getting the same work order 6 and 7 and 8 times we‟re simply spending too

Building & Sites Committee                   18                             April 30, 2008
much money so we may as well just heat it up a bit more. So we‟ve allowed that to
        Mr. Clougherty said there was talk about a potential energy policy that has been
talked about and may be coming about. This sheet shows percentages of the schools that
we‟re talking about that have the energy management system with the ability to limit the
adjustability of the thermostats. He said “just looking at it from the top of my head I
think the number is somewhere around 70% of the classrooms and other areas where you
have the ability to limit the adjustment. When we look at Memorial, Central, West,
Southside, Hillside, Parkside, those are all 50-60-70%. Those are the largest schools in
the District by far.”
        Chairman Beaudry asked “Northwest is at 20%, so 80% of that school they can
take care of themselves?” Mr. Clougherty replied “yes.” Chairman Beaudry asked “the
reason for Northwest and green Acres to have that much control, personal control?” Mr.
Clougherty said “we haven‟t upgraded the ventilation systems there to the point that we
have…..” Chairman Beaudry said “at Green Acres we just went over that whole school
didn‟t we?” Mr. Clougherty said “only for the ventilation through the sound attenuation
program. The problem that you have is the heat for these schools is fed through thin-tube
radiation, the hot-water piping along the exterior of the building. Current code hasn‟t
really changed and it hasn‟t said you‟ve got to provide more heat or anything like that so
the systems that were original to those schools still work. At Green Acres I know we put
in radiation and made it nicer looking but it is still operational. The mechanical codes
have changed that require ventilation. So we‟re dumping ventilation in, that‟s fresh air,
it‟s tempered fresh air but the main source of heat is the fin-tube radiation at the exterior
of the buildings. So you can still change the temperature in your room and you‟re still
getting the adequate and appropriate amounts of ventilation.”
        Chairman Beaudry said “actually, with that being said though, in the summer if the
ventilation is coming in at 100 degrees you can shut the heat right off and that room will
eventually heat up to 100 degrees. Am I correct in saying that? Like the problem we
have at Highland where there is so much air being pumped into that and when the hot
weather comes the hot ambient air is coming in off the roofs. It has been better since
they put in the white roofs but that was one of the concerns. I know when Turner did
their report they said that the air that we‟re pumping into the school is so hot that it just
heats up and dries out the school.” Mr. Clougherty said “I don‟t know.” Chairman
Beaudry said “my point is that they can shut the thermostats off in some of these schools
if it‟s hot enough out because the room is going to get hot virtue of the ventilation system
putting in hot air.” Mr. Clougherty said “if the thermostat is operating properly it‟s shut
off long before it is 100 degrees in the room.” Chairman Beaudry said “maybe I‟m not
saying it right. If it is the end of June, like we‟re going to be almost into July with the
end of school this year, and if it‟s 90 degrees out and the ventilation systems aren‟t
pumping 90 degree ventilation into that room, the thermostat could be shut off or it won‟t
be going back on but that room is still going to be going up to 90 degrees because the air
coming in through the ventilation system is 90 degrees.” Mr. Clougherty said “yes, but
that really has nothing to do with the thermostat though.” Chairman Beaudry said
“exactly, and maybe I didn‟t make my point clear. I know some teachers may claim that
it is too hot in their classroom but it has nothing to do with the heat itself.” Mr.
Clougherty said “we‟re hopeful that it doesn‟t. But I‟m sure there are isolated incidences

Building & Sites Committee                   19                             April 30, 2008
where you know the heating system is deficient. I‟m certainly not going to sit here and
tell you that everything runs perfectly. But as I think we discussed last month we‟ve got
some areas at West High School where I know they have a direct southern exposure with
the roof just outside of the windows along Main Street and I know those classrooms get
real hot. I was over there in the wintertime and it bothers me when I see windows open
in schools but in some instances the solar gain and the heat you‟re getting from the
outside is enough to overheat the classrooms even in the wintertime. The same is true
with western exposures; at Central High School for instance.”
        Chairman Beaudry said “I know Comm. Craig made a comment earlier and I don‟t
know if the Committee wants to make a recommendation about starting a regulation of
the temperatures or not. We can do something. I don‟t know how well that is going to
over with the principals but I mean we can set a standard if that is something that the
Committee would like to see.” Comm. Craig said “I think it is more a policy that needs
to be set. I think in the situation where we are where we‟re trying to save every penny we
can this is a step forward. I mean you could save significant dollars by setting parameters
of where the thermostat should be.” Chairman Beaudry said “we can do 2 things tonight.
We can just pass it off to the Coordination Committee or if you want to set a range of
temperature then we could move that to the Coordination Committee as a
recommendation from this Committee that we would want a certain range. We could do
it that way also.”
        Comm. Craig asked “what are they set at? What would you recommend?” Mr.
Clougherty said “I‟d recommend that you heat probably somewhere between 68-70
degrees at the very high end and air condition to probably 76 degrees. I‟d also
recommend visiting schedules for air conditioning and ventilation. A lot of times you
have people that work during the summer that request that the air conditioning be on
Monday through Friday and I don‟t think that that is really necessary. I don‟t think you
have people visiting every school all of those times.” Chairman Beaudry said “I know
that a lot of the principals work through the summer. Can they turn it on just in the
offices or….?” Mr. Clougherty said “well, that is the only place you have air
conditioning. But if the expectation is that when you walk in at 9:30 or 10:00 or 11:00 or
whenever you happen to come in that day that the space is air conditioned I think you‟re
wasting some energy there.” Chairman Beaudry said “OK.”
        Chairman Beaudry asked “do you think that 70 degrees is hot enough? Do you
think it should be 68-72 degrees or do you think that 70 degrees is…..? I know that with
body heat things will be warmed up even more but…… I know there are more hot
complaints than there are cold complaints.” Comm. Craig said “I personally think that 70
degrees is enough.” Ms. DeFrancis asked “what is it currently at?” Mr. Clougherty said
“it‟s between 68-70 degrees. We don‟t go too much higher than that.” Comm. Craig said
“ I‟ve heard it‟s 74 from some teachers and they have their windows open.” Mr.
Clougherty said “if it‟s 74 degrees then my technicians have gone beyond their directives
because it shouldn‟t be. That is not to say that some aren‟t at 74, they probably are. We
don‟t have a policy to go by. If we continually get complaints from the same teacher or
classroom or area then we‟re going to turn up. It‟s not to say that we‟re going to turn it
up to 78 or something but we may turn it up to 74 degrees.” Chairman Beaudry said
“again, if you have northern exposure, these buildings are so big and the ceilings are so
high in some of the older schools you know if you have it at 70 degrees it may be too hot

Building & Sites Committee                  20                            April 30, 2008
with the southern exposure but the northern exposure it‟s too cold.” Mr. Clougherty said
“you‟re absolutely right. I know that you‟re a champion for Bakersville School and the
outside of that building along those windows is much colder than the interior. The
windows are leaky. We have to look at every circumstance individually but I think a
policy is absolutely necessary. Bakersville is the exception to the rule.” Chairman
Beaudry said “as long as we use common sense with the policy. That‟s the thing. I don‟t
want something etched and someone calls in to say some place is too cold or it‟s too hot
and the response is that the policy says this or this, you know we still have to educate the
students.” Mr. Clougherty said “I want to be sure that I‟m clear as well. Bakersville is
the exception to the rule. We don‟t have any other schools out there that are anywhere
like that in my opinion. McDonough used to be like that and the James Building at
Central too but we‟ve replaced those exterior wall systems and they‟re pretty tight now.”
       Chairman Beaudry asked “so do you want to put a recommendation in with those
numbers in it and send it to the Coordination Committee?”
       Comm. Craig made a motion to make a recommendation to have a policy to
heat school buildings between 68-70 degrees at the high end and to air condition at
76 degrees. Comm. Gelinas seconded the motion. The motion passed. This would
be sent to the Coordination Committee.
       The next item discussed was the problem with the intercom system at Bakersville
School. The Committee was told that Mr. Smith, the District‟s IT Director, was handling
this problem. A suggestion was to check to see if this would be something to send to the
Joint Building Committee. Ms. DeFrancis was asked to check with Mr. Smith to
determine the status of this matter. Also, to check if there was a similar problem with the
intercom systems at Henry Wilson School and at Beech Street School. Ms. DeFrancis
would report back to the Committee on her findings.

    The meeting was adjourned at this time.


Suzanne O. Sears
Clerk of the Board

Building & Sites Committee                  21                             April 30, 2008

To top