Hey everybody So Should we wait another minute or so Sharon, you know the George is joining us. Hi, it's George joining us I haven't heard that he isn't but he wasn't in work today Okay All right five is a quorum, right? Yes, okay then um Then let's let's launch Angie are we good do you want to say your thing? Welcome to this meeting of the Jones library building committee We are currently being recorded to the cloud this video will be uploaded to the town of Amherst YouTube channel And at this time I'd like to turn things over to the chair Professor Austin Sarat. Thank you so much Angie. Okay, so the first order of business is to Just have you signify that you are present Christine Alex right here Sean here Sharon here Austin Thank you all so I'm we're hoping that a few others of our committee will join us, but we're gonna launch right in Three sets of minutes to approve July 22nd August 9th and August 23rd, so let's take them Order Move to a motion to approve the minutes of July 26th The second second Comments on on the minutes Corrections to the minutes Okay, we ready to vote on the minutes I'm gonna ask you again to signify vocally your approval of the minutes Christine Alex I'm gonna abstain because I haven't had a chance to read them. Yeah Why did we get those I saw today? We got the 23rd, so they should be should have been in the packet If people have not had a chance to read them. We will lay them over. Have you read any of these minutes? Okay Let's Austin they're not in the packet then let's lay them over including the minutes for the 23rd Okay, next item on the agenda is the report a report from the town manager on project status Paul Indicated that he was in another meeting and he would be a little late So my suggestion is that we hold off on hearing Paul's report until Paul can come So next item of business a financial update Sean Thanks, Austin. So we have two things one I'm happy to announce that the amendment with a designer has been signed. So we have that all in place and Craig has a copy which is good and Then along those lines We do have the the two invoices from the designer just to keep You know consistent with our practice I don't think they've been formally approved at this committee level yet unless someone tells me otherwise so I would look to Bring both of those invoices up now for a vote and I can share my screen if anybody wants to see them, but they're consistent with the share real quick Thank You Sean So the first invoice is for May and it's the first half of our roughly first half of schematic design for 163,500 This has been reviewed and approved by Collier's Great, and then the second invoice maybe we can just vote them in a batch as the balance of the The balance of schematic design. So the total amount is the 327,000 dollars between the two invoices So you're gonna make a motion to approve that we pay 327,000 dollars Yeah, I move that we approve the May and June invoices For fine gold Alexander. Thanks so much. Is there a second second? Okay, any discussion about these invoices Okay, I want to note before we vote the presence of Xander and of Anika Zander. Can you just let us know that you can hear us? Xander Okay, so it's broken up a little bit, but his hand is Try again Yeah, I can hear you. Great. Thank you Xander Anika. I can hear you and my only question is Xander, I don't know what Xander's question is Xander. Can you type it? Yeah, sorry. I just was switching phone settings. Is that better? Yeah Great. My only question was Sean. What was the thing that we got signed with the design team? Our contract amendments. So we had an original contract and we needed to we've been working really for the last several months to Get an amendment to that contract for the basically the rest of the project. And so it lays out the cost for schematic design design development, construction documents, bidding, construction management, everything. It lays out the costs associated with each of those phases. And what the invoices that we're approving tonight are for the work that they've already completed for schematic design. That's awesome. The only other just follow up to that is, do any of those amendments have forced major language in the event that the project becomes untenable to fund to the end? We've included language in the amendments that speak to that that's that basically we are responsible for the portion of the project that is completed. And that the only The only Basically clause that we have 12 not the only clause, but one clause we have to be mindful of is if we bring the project to bidding, then we're required to pay 75% of the design fee. If we bring it to bidding and then decide not to move forward at that point up until that point, it's it goes section by section or phase by phase. Xander, did that answer your question? Yes. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thanks for the thanks for the question. So any other question about the invoices? Okay, Christine, vote to approve recommend the payment of the invoices. Yes. Alex. Yes. Sharon. Yes. Xander. Yes. Thank you. Anika. Yes. Thank you. Sean. Yes. And Austin vote. Yes. Sean. Thanks for that. So I wanted to raise a question about finances thinking thinking forward. But again, I guess I'll wait until Paul comes. And if we're ready to end before Paul comes, then I'll raise the question at that at that point. Okay. Colliers project leaders Craig, thank you for joining us. Certainly. If it's okay with you, Austin, I will share my screen. Please do. All right. So the first thing to review is the schedule. So here's a little bit bigger. So here's the schedule we've been working with as before, you know, our red line is where we are today, the beginning of September, as before, I've got some stripes shapes that I put in there showing that we have that things are are slipping a little bit between the end of schematic design and the start of design development. So we've completed schematic design, but we have the town has not given Fine Gold Alexander the okay to move into design development. So we know that that will have a little impact on the schedule. Are there any questions about that? That's sort of all there is to report at this time. Any question about the schedule that's on the screen? Yeah, Sean. Just some interpreting this right, Craig, the June milestone. Are you saying that moves to December? The anticipated MVLC grant disbursement? Yes. So that update is a product of two different things. One, that disbursement is tied to the completion of construction documents. So just by virtue of us having some schedule slippage that moved out. However, the MVLC also issued a letter stating that they were going to withhold that until the end of the bid phase. So once bids were received and a contract has been signed. So So no matter what we're looking at FY 24 for that second payment. Yes. Okay. Yep, sure. So that's why that one slides more than sort of everything else. Okay. And once things once the dust settles and we have a path forward, you know, I'll take a fresh look at the schedule clean it all up. So we won't be just forever looking at this kind of patched together version. And so then we'll have from that point forward a nice clean understanding and plan. Right. I see Alex has her hand up. Alex. Thanks. So I want to make sure I heard what you said correctly. So the MVLC regulations state when we get to the end of a design phase and one fiscal year after the first payment that we're supposed to get the second payment. And they're now saying that instead of following those regulations, they're going to wait until the end of bid phase to give us that payment. So yes, my understanding is that not only is it the next fiscal year after the first disbursement, but it's also tied, you know, just part of the regulations is it's connected to the completion and acceptance of the construction documents. So that's the regulations sort of, you know, it was published on the website. But then beyond that, we've recently got correspondence that indicates they will they actually want to wait until the end of the bid phase to make that disbursement. And it's, it's the letter to paraphrase the letter, they are concerned about the viability of this project based on the gap between the budget and the estimated costs. And so instead of giving that money or dispersing that money and then the project be found to be terminated at the end of, you know, bid phase before moving to construction, they said they want to see that the that the town is moving forward with construction. Okay, so just so I'm hearing this correctly so basically the MVLC is worried because of the delays that we have been in at this moment that the project has uncertainty so we're basically by continuing to delay jeopardizing the funding that the MVLC is paying us. I don't think it's a time. They didn't talk too much about the time delay. It was more a concern that that if the bids come in and they're even higher say then predicted or higher than the town, the community can afford. They didn't want to make that disbursement and then three months later find out that, you know, projects are moving forward so it's more like you said sort of concern about the sort of the risk of the project now moving forward. So if, if I may. Awesome. Can I please go ahead. So, so if we as a town can put together some sort of I mean I I share this concern myself right I mean you know I'm I'm have echoed on more than one occasion that you know we were told when was our last meeting that we are increasing costs by the week right and while we're looking for you know $100,000 let's say and savings which is important we are at the same time putting let's say $300,000 and cost back on the table and so I have a certain measure of frustration around that. And we the trustees are offering to do all the fundraising to keep it off town. But we're not the ones necessarily making the decision so it sounds like if I guess I'm wondering if the NBL say we can come up with some sort of certainty agreement right between the trustees and the town around project certainty. I'm wondering if they're amenable to put it back on the schedule, because I understand I have concern about, you know, raising money when I'm not controlling the process. Can I can I jump in to Austin real quick on one thing just to keep in mind to so the the important. So, it looks like either way it's coming in FY 24. Because the original schedule had it coming on June of 2023 construction documents now are not going to be finalized until looks like September. So one way or another it's coming in FY 24 based on the schedule. Sort of the big the thing we were trying to avoid was not getting a payment in FY 23 because then that pushes everything out of fiscal year, but it looks like in any event based on the current schedule it's going to be pushed out that one more year. But everything you said I think is right Alex in terms of still trying to advocate to the NBLC to make that payment at the end of construction documents it'll get it to the town a few months earlier than what they're proposing, but it's still going to be an FY 24, which means the next payment won't come to 25 and the 26 and the 27 Alex does that help. Yeah, I mean I guess for my own purposes I mean I've been immensely frustrated and I don't even know at who because I don't know who to be frustrated with but I've been immensely frustrated by the very clear direction that we received from the designers and the opm about timelines and schedules. And that we're not adhering to them and that we are continuing to increase costs and again it's the trustees who are taking on that additional cost for fundraising efforts. And so, for me, I really really really need a schedule that everyone can agree to that everyone can stick to, and that we can have some cost certainty and some project certainty around and so I don't know if this is it. I don't know, you know, I'm not even sure who's making decisions at this point, but I really really need some clarity around the process to who and the dates because we're just making this project more and more expensive. And I, we need to find cuts we need to do it quickly we need to be efficient about it and then we need to either decide to go forward or not go forward. But the more we delay the more we delay the more we delay delay is a decision, right. So, I would love to have some certainty around timelines and decisions. And that's not necessarily this group, but I don't know who it is it just put it out there, maybe that's a later conversation. I need you to be a little. I'm just having timelines and decisions about what.  So when you say clarity about timelines and decisions. Could you say a little bit more about what it is that you're hoping for. Yeah, we have been very clearly told from a designer in the opm that we need to move into the design phase we are still in schematic design. Yeah, schematic design is the barest barest minimum of design work. And so in order for us to really dig in deep to the details we have to move into design. I want to know when we are going to make the decision and who is making the decision that we move forward into design. And from what I understand we won't have price certainty until we get to the bid phase. So I think initially that there was a $1.4 million cost to that which now is up to two and I'm assuming as Xander so rightly pointed out and then. Yeah, I now that I understand that clause right about the bid phase that you talked about Sean now I understand why that number I think went up. And again, right, I mean the designers just like the MVLC are hedging their bets because we are not moving forward. So, do we need to make decisions about getting to a price certain. And what does that mean are the trustees paying for that is the town paying for that are we both paying for that. I mean, right right now the owner seems completely on us the trustees and yet we're not the ones. We made our decision we made our decision a couple of weeks ago, we're ready to go but we're bearing the cost of the delays. So I don't know whether town is going to pitch in because of these delays or what so I just I need some clarity so we can make a plan and move forward. Awesome. Can I respond before you do Sean Craig just for a minute, could you take down your screen share because you'd be good to see each other's faces we talk about the Sean. So just a couple of things I think one of them in the town manager gets here. Hopefully that will be part of his report in terms of we had the initial conversation with the finance committee and then what the process looks like going forward. And I'll just put out there that we have reached out to the designer and the opm just to find out what their monthly rates would be we sort of know the, the, the fee for a whole section, like design development or construction documents but we've also reached out to say what would one month at a time, if we want to keep it going to your point to try to avoid delays while decisions being made. So we've reached out to them and I think Craig got me that information today so we have some more information to consider. Alex. I'm wondering I mean, do we need to wait till the town manager gets here to have a more full conversation or like when is that decision being made Sean like, like here's my concern right like we meet every two weeks or like, sorry, my corporate background is driving me to talk about it in two weeks, right like so if we've done that who's making that decision that we move forward like I. Right so it's ultimately the town manager's decision from what I can tell in terms of the contract and moving from one stage to the next that's pretty clear that the town manager makes that decision. You know I appreciate your frustration. I think it's quite as simple as sort of the way framing it but but in terms of your question about who decides if we move forward. The town manager gives a direction to the designer to move from one stage to the next. So, when Paul is here we'll come back to this but I do want to say. I think that there are conversations going on in the town in town among the leadership of the town to figure out the best way to move forward in making the decisions. I take it that's why there was a meeting of the finance committee to try to lay out for the leadership of the town first through the finance committee. What is going on with this project. And to provide as much information as possible the library directed it as usual a great job in providing information and the finance committee had some more questions will provide some more information. So those conversations going on I hope that Paul will be able to give us a little clarity about when they're going to be concluded and how's that going to go forward. But there's of course another, another question which I don't know whether Alex is raising this question. And that is if we go forward with design development and get to the bid phase. There'll be another decision point. Right. That's also part of your it was that also part of your question, Alex. Yeah, I mean, yes, we're going to get to the bid phase. And we're going to create another decision point and then I want to know what happens. I mean, do we go through this whole one month, two months to lay again. Do we like who's making that decision. Do we have. So I just want some certainty around, I don't know what the rules of the game are. Okay, so that's yet another thing to talk about which is at the end of if, if we go forward with design development as this committee has recommended to the town manager. And we got to figure out when that decision will be made and when all those things will be tied up, then there'll be another decision point later on and Alex is raising the question about when how will that decision be made who will make it and what time frame. Is that right that I get it right. So I see Xander and then short and Xander. I just wanted, as long as we're waiting for town manager. I've been curious, what other projects that have also won this grant are doing right now.  Great. So Sharon is going to inform you about a meeting that was held this morning, Sharon. So, there is another initiative that that we've just started working on. I'm at today with Elin Greece, the town council president, along with Senator Cumberford and Representative Dom. We're looking to join forces with the other 13 libraries from across the state who are experiencing the same escalation problems that we are. And so we're looking to join forces between libraries and municipal leaders and the state and local representatives, so that we can ask the state to cover this, this escalation costs for these libraries. Another initiative that that we're hoping to help fill this the gap for all of these libraries. And more detail will be laid out for the board of trustees of the Jones library about any of those initiatives so that the board can express its views and support for those initiatives and can be willing to have Amherst involved in it. So we'll take it that the town, the town manager, the town council president, the council will also have to weigh in on how we pursue, or if we pursue how we pursue such a such an initiative. Thank you Sharon. And Christine. Yeah, I just also wanted to point out that they're the town council meeting on Monday night as the Jones library on it. And then there's a finance committee the next day that the topic will also be that that's pretty much the only topic at this point will also be the library project. So next week there'll be two meetings on this. Thank you. Christine. Yeah, that meeting that Sharon went to sounds great joined forces sounds great, you know, multiple people feeling the pain but and I hear that more details are coming. But just we're back to that timeline. I feel like I'm following up on Alex and, you know, we need time right now like the next couple of weeks I like it. And I assume that that initiative is there any kind of timeline. No, right now there's no real time. Well, the timeline that we have is the hour let Joe and Mindy will be reaching out to the other legislators on Monday. I've already reached out to all of the librarians and Lynn is going to reach out to her, her colleagues across the state so we're hoping to make this quick but what once we have a, you know, a critical mass of folks that we can join forces then we'll take it to the next level. You know we want to work with the MBLC on this and the governor's office and we'll see where it goes. Is that okay Christine. Yeah, thanks. So I take it that that these efforts at the state level are subject not to our timeline but to theirs, and we can articulate I was not part of the meeting today. We can articulate what our needs are for time. But, and I'm sure that our representatives would have heard that clearly. But how fast any of this can move. Whether it can produce any results. You know there's the deer field letter that to the governor about our money and how that will proceed that's all. I think kind of above our pay grade in terms of sending the time, but I take it again I wasn't there that Sharon made clear to the people that she met with that there was some. I don't know urgency to getting progress and answers. And I believe that it's important to get answers, whether those answers are yes we can help you or no we can't. Because the uncertainty about whether or not we're going to get help more help through the state processes has an effect on other decisions that are going to be made about the financing of the project and the future of the project so I again Sharon you might just want to be clear with everybody was there clarity in that meeting about the need for sooner is better than later and an answer is better than we'll see. Yes, so yes they know all of that. And based on the experience that my conversations that I've had with the librarians, several of them who are in the same boat that we are are in the process of receiving updated cost estimates and there are a couple so we're lucky that the cost estimate is only a 30% increase and others, their, their increases are up as high as 50 plus percent. So, time is of the essence for all of us. Okay, so any other questions on this and again we'll come back to this question Alex especially about the town thing when Paul and Paul arrived but I appreciate you raising it in relationship to the time frame that Craig laid out so Craig back to you. Thank you, Austin. I'll share my screen again, and we'll move on to the second, oops, onto the second topic, which is the value management or value engineering or cost reduction list. So this is a list that was reviewed at the design subcommittee. The subcommittee made recommendations for this committee relative to which, which items on this list they thought we should incorporate into the design. And so, Austin I would, I would ask how, how would you like me to proceed. What I would like to do at this point is to ask for a motion to approve this list as recommended by the design subcommittee. And if there is a motion and a second to approve the list and might we this will be like the fifth time that this committee has seen this list. My hope is that we could approve it, kind of on block as they said, we're rather than going through item by item, but let's get a motion to approve. And then if there's a second, we can then if anybody has any questions about any of these items, this would be the time to raise them. So, Alex. Thanks, I'd actually like to discuss two items. So what I'd like to do first. So I'm sorry, let me rephrase it. I want to go ahead. Well go ahead. So, so there are two items that I think can be moved because I've gotten additional information. Since the design meeting. And so I'm hoping to be able to move them into the plausible category as part of the discussion or I don't know how you want to handle that. But I think might be the most efficient thing to do is to make a motion to approve the list, then to have a second of that motion. And then we can discuss anything on the list and if someone wants to make a change and say I want to mend it this way or that way. So moved. Good. Okay. So now the motion has been made and seconded to approve the list on block. Now, if anybody would like to question anything on the list, or to say that anything should be moved. Now would be the time to do it. Alex. Thank you. Okay, so item numbers. Or is it. Well, yeah, so it's not really here. So I don't think so one of the discussions during the design subcommittee meeting was the use of synthetic slate versus actual slate. And that that would have cost savings and as George very rightly pointed out his experience with Amherst historic has not been necessarily amenable to that. The boat went in used sustainable used a synthetic slate. So Sharon and I reached out to epsilon our historic tax consultant and inquired if they have seen the use of synthetic slate on historic projects and if they've been able to pursue tax credits and the answer was yes. So that means that mass historic would prove it and both Amherst historic and mass historic follow the state same state standards. So I don't know what the savings cost is yet. But I think that is one that we can move into the plausible category, based on that information if, and I have a second one as well, but I'll talk about this one. Okay. So, Craig, do you want to say anything about this question about the slate? Sure, yeah, so we did not pursue it. Based on the discussion at the design super made that it did not seem plausible. So I didn't ask the cost of this marriage frame further information, however I can, and will, and hopefully they'll have information to me by tomorrow. The only piece of information that we have at this point is they did give information on swapping out the real slate for standing seen metal. And that was a pretty sizable credit of $320,000. So, while we don't know that the exact reduction in cost by going to some synthetic slate, it does have the potential to be a large item. So do you want to get back to us at our next meeting about the synthetic slate issue and we can kind of leave it to the side and accept that we will come back and discuss it. Would that work for you Alex. Sure, that's yeah, either that or I would move it to be accepted and fill in the number when we get it.  I would like to move it to the accepted and fill in the number we know it's going to be a savings. We know we can do it.  Okay, so there's if you will there's a motion to to amend this by moving it to the accepted column. Second. Good. Okay, Sean. Can I ask a separate question or should we vote on that first focus on this one. Is that okay. Yeah, yeah, come you come back to me. Okay, so is there any discussion about this synthetic slate. Craig, do you want to say anything about it. I don't have any more information offer. Sorry. Okay. All right, any other discussion of this. I think I see Christine saying Christine. Yeah, I just want to talk about item. It's item eight and 8.1. Just for people who weren't in the design subcommittee meeting or didn't watch it. So eight is the flat roof and 8.1 is the sawtooth. Yeah, so I just wanted to complete the slate thing and then come back to Alex. Could we do that. Oh, I thought we were done with that. Okay, so I just want to get a vote to move it to the accepted. Sean. Yes. Alex. Yes. Christine. Yes. Sharon. Yes. Xander. Yes. Yes. And Austin votes yes now back to Alex. You have another. I do. So item eight and 8.1. There was discussion in the design subcommittee meeting about sustainability committee. So I checked in with the engineer on our sustainability committee. And what's told that a flat roof in lieu of a sawtooth is not a sustainability issue. If we have flat solar panels that we had after the fact, they're still going to be able to draw what they need. And in terms of day lighting, we can look at options like solar tubes, which are much less expensive than the skylights and still get the day lighting we need. So those items, at least from a sustainability standpoint, could be put back on the table because I think that's why they weren't being considered. And it sounds like there are some issues to get day lighting in that are much less expensive. So I don't know that we would see the full. What is it 495 and 250, but those are two pretty significant cuts that I think we could make as well. Christian, you wanted to speak to those particular items, right? Yeah, I just want to clarify to everyone to make sure everyone knows what they're looking at with those two and Craig, please. I'm wrong, but so Alex is right. We could go with the whole flat roof or move all the sawtooth and it's a savings of 495 a half million dollars. And why the 250 and 8.1 was left because that was for the designers to go back and think about they were supposed to be seven of these and maybe think about what if there were only three or four. There's another skylight that runs over the stairwell kind of area. You know, could that be made a little larger and other ways to incorporate more light, which would also be opening larger windows, mostly on the west side. Craig, I don't know if, how is the designer going to get back to us on that, you know, so they were wearing that option of course they wanted to leave them but it's this committee to decide whether it should be half full none. Yep. Austin if I may, please do the something we talked about briefly in the design subcommittee was the concept of design to target. This would be an example of that. The design team has not yet developed a different scheme, whether it's fewer sawtooths, different sawtooths, no sawtooths with, you know, some combination of skylights or daylight tubes to be determined and that is something that will be determined. The design subcommittee and work through during design development the next phase, but what the design team felt confident they could do is whatever scheme they come up with they felt that they could achieve half of those savings so that that's where the $250,000 savings come from. So, while we do not know what the end result will be, they feel confident that they can remove quarter million dollars from the project cost of the project by manipulating the roof. But that doesn't necessarily mean a commitment to reducing the number of sawtooth elements. Right. They said that they'll, they would work on a solution. They would target that $250,000 savings, but they don't know what that solution is yet. So that would involve more study more development that there are, you know, they would do in the next phase. Sean, I'm sorry, is your hands up from this or is it the remainder of. Actually, my question was on 8.1 but now it's on both 8.0 and 8.1. I'm sorry, go ahead. It's pretty simple. I was wondering is there a way before we vote on these two or maybe not 8.1 but 8.0 if we were to vote on that one is a way to see what that looks like or what that impact would be. Like examples of it, maybe another building. I'm just trying to, I'm not, I don't have a good understanding of what the sawtooth. What that looks like on the top of the building and if we were to make that flat does that change the building in a significant way. I actually they armed me with some images and renderings that we've seen before but I'll pull them up for reference. Thank you. All right, so what we're seeing in this image which is the rear of the library is these elements up at the roof are the that sawtooth skylight so they are even though it's a roof element which usually you don't see from the ground. These would be sufficiently tall and close to the edge that they are a part of the aesthetic or the look of the library. See if they included a side image. I don't think they did. But. All right, so we know what we can imagine what it would look like without those. If we go to that flat roof and that's that 450. $195,000 savings. These elements are just gone. And the new roof line is this gamble roof flat roof. That's all we would see. Same thing for this wing. Beyond that other options for that $250,000 savings. They don't know what that looks like yet. And so we don't. So we don't have any examples they haven't even, you know, conceived what it might be. You could reasonably say maybe it's fewer sawtooths, maybe it's, you know, like a light monitors, which are protrusions in the roof that have a glazed face to them.  If we ever were considering solar panels on the roof in any way. Great. I think it's, I think the design team will find a place to put the solar panels in one form or another so right now the idea is the solar panels would go on the south facing edge the non glazed slope of these sawtooths. If we have a flat scheme where it's a layout of skylights on the panels would kind of go in between the skylights we won't have so many skylights that there's no area left. But I think the design team will be able to include some space or area for portable tech panels. Thank you. I got Christine, and then Alex Christine. I'm just hoping the group is thinking. I mean this is a tough decision. This is, you know, the designers are trying to redesign it and obviously they want it to look a certain way. But we're trying to figure out whether we should cut a quarter of a million or a half million dollars so I just want everyone to keep that mind and Craig if you could just show that inside rendering that just helps like that's the outside that's helpful but just I believe Alex was next Alex. Yeah, so I'm just Sean to reiterate so the our engineer who's on our sustainability committee basically said you know the solar panels. His words still make juice even if they're flat so moving to a flat roof isn't going to change our ability to have solar panels on the roof and again, the solar panels, you know, we just we don't have enough roof space to really produce a whole lot of, you know, it's not going to be running the building just because we can't put them on the 1928 but we still can add them for sure. And I misspoke I said solar tubes but it's a sun tunnel, I guess they Lux makes them that was over River Valley. So intent instead of a skylight you can use, or instead of the day lighting, you can use these some tunnels which are much less expensive than skylights and the daylights and still get the day lighting in which I know was one of the primary concerns. And quite frankly, one of the comments we got most in the outreach subcommittee about what people wanted was was natural daylight so certainly an important thing that we don't want to lose but I, from what I've been told, I think we can take the, the half million dollar cut and right retain those things. And the question about the design which goes to the question that Sean raised, which is, in addition to the sustainability, is there something to be said and behalf of the sort of sawtooth design. And the architects obviously thought there was, because they proposed it. I just wonder before we toss them aside whether or not we want to think about it from the point of view design, not just from the point of view of sustainability. Christine. Again, if we can go back Craig to that internal rendering interior. So, we skipped over it but item one and item two was sort of about changing out and later on, I think it's item 11. So we're looking at here. All that wood ceiling, what we're proposing be gone, and we'll focus more on the CLT so it will rise up I think Craig, Ellen had given a picture, sort of what that looks like. Okay, there's some. So, you're showing the CLT, and you're not hanging ceilings below that. So, actually, this is kind of good the one on the right shows sort of like a monitor, what we're talking about the sawtooth monitors, and then the one on the lower left is more if you just have a flat ceiling. So, we're looking at here, but we do, if you go back to the rendering that are rendering Craig. So, if Craig could point out so there's a still a skylight that runs down the middle. That's still there we're not talking about that right now that's still there, we're just talking about the monitors on the far left and right are there ways to incorporate more light either a larger skylight or more windows or these tubes. That's what we're thinking so when you're looking at this remember we've already made huge changes. Any other comments about the sawtooth tooth versus the flat roof. So it is as Craig's chart shows a substantial savings. It is also a substantial change in the design. Anything else anyone wants to say. I take it that the proposal would be, am I understanding this Alex the proposal is to move the 495 in item eight from not possible into accepted. Is that your. That is. Okay, so let's have discussion of this Sharon and then Anika. I just wanted to say, yes, I do feel that the architects will will be a little disappointed that they, because of the aesthetic the difference but we're not talking about a savings of, you know $50,000 or $100,000. It's $500,000. So, I think it's something we should do. Yes, I had a, well, along the same lines but also a question in regards to consequence. I know some pointed out that we've seen this list, numerous times it was, you know, still, you know, we've had we have some new information today in regards to these this roof and cut so I'm wondering if that would be the time frame like let's if this list is approved today. Is that it do is there a timeline that would allow you know if there are other discoveries made on some, you know potential saving costs down the line is that still a possibility or would this be final. Thank you Craig. So Anika there are, we'll continue this discussion. There are some things that we can continue to reduce cost on at each phase of the project. You know the one caveat to that is certain decisions are that are made now in this phase are somewhat irreversible. I mean anything reversible but it would cost time and money. An example of that would be, which we talked about in the past the decision to have mass timber framing over steel that's something that you decide early in the process. The exterior materials on the site are something that can be decided very late in the process in the design process. And so yes there will be other opportunities. And just later in the design to continue to reduce cost. Anika your hand is still up. Okay. I just forgot to put it down. No, I just didn't know what you had another question. The proposal is to move the sort modifying the sort to roof, roof, and to substitute a flat roof in lieu of a sort to roof for to from not plausible to accept it. Is there any further discussion of this, this is a substantial change. This is a sum of something of a big deal. And the big dealness I think the biggest of the big deals are things that go to the integrity of the program. I don't think this goes to the integrity of the program, but it is a substantial change in the conception that has driven the design of this building. And I'm just going to say for myself, I'm a little reluctant to make that change at this point. Because it does affect the, the whole design I don't think you just chop off the sort to roof, you know, and we got a flat roof. But people want to want to make it, then we'll make it. So is there any other discussion of this item number eight. I'm going to ask you to vote yes, or no yes would move it from not plausible to accepted no would keep it right where it is. Christine. Yes. Alex. Yes. Sharon. Yes. Sean. Yes. Xander. Don't Xander's not there at the moment. Yes. Okay, and Austin is going to vote no. And I'll just tell you why. I frankly think that before we make such a change. We should have more consultation with the architects, because my worry is that this is going to ripple. It's not just going to be the sort to the going. So that's why I voted no, but okay, we'll be moved to accepted. Thank you. So any other questions about the items on this list. Okay, if we go forward with this list Craig the total that we would have saved would be 1.9 plus million dollars. That's correct. So we're going to vote now to accept this list and this list will then be transmitted right Craig to the architects and the architects will begin to work off of this list. And any subsequent going back to this list. I take it what you said is that we could go back but it would result in more design work and therefore more, more expense. For certain items. Okay. All right, are we ready to vote Christine yes to accept the list as amended. No, not to. Yes. Alex. Yes. Sharon. Yes. Sean. Yes. Xander. Thank you. Anika. Yes. Great. Thank you very much. Thanks for the list thanks to everybody for their good work and looking at those items. Craig. I wonder if you can help alleviate some confusion about the anticipated cost savings in the project. So I think everybody now needs to have a clear sense of what it is that we're talking about we have just approved the list. That would reduce the cost of the project by 1.9 some odd million dollars. But there are other contemplated cost savings is that correct. Yes, what are they. So the one that I've heard which is a very concrete is reducing the furniture and equipment budget from I think it's approximately 2.5 million dollars, reduce it by a million dollars. So what is that decision actually have to be made. That's a decision. So, to walk, walk you through my thought process, the furniture and equipment designers have not yet been engaged, but the design team has asked that they be engaged for the start of design development. So I think that we should have direction for them at the beginning of design development so that is a decision that we should make. That is a decision that we should make when in the next couple weeks as part of the moving, giving them authorized giving the design team as a whole authorization to move from schematic design to design development. That's the information that they will need at that time. So I believe that this committee needs to be presented with a proposal and kind of detailed understanding of what would be entailed if we reduce the FF and E by a million dollars. In broad terms, the, the result will be a lot of the furniture that's existing in the library would be reused in the new library. Yes, I don't know about anyone else but that's very helpful but not helpful enough. So I'd really like to know what we're talking about a lot of the furniture, like, what does that mean and what does it mean in terms of furnishing in the new wing and what does the reduction in equipment budget mean. So we've been very careful and very detailed in looking at the list that we just looked at. And I just think we need to have a clear sense of what a reduction in FF and he means. So, I wonder if for our next meeting which hopefully can be in a couple of weeks. If that's still timely is that still timely. Yes, assuming it'll take a couple weeks for the town to give fine gold Alexander the okay to move into DD. So, again, this is in peril. Do you all share my sense that we need more detail about this. Okay.  So we've got 1.9 that we've approved we've got another million possible based on a proposal that we haven't yet seen in bed. Are there any other anticipated cost savings of which we are in control. None that I'm aware of. Okay, so potentially, depending on what we approve 2.9 million in cost savings. That we can control. There are anticipated changes in the escalation estimate. Is that right. So where things stand now we base the amount of money for escalation on the cost estimators best guess. And I think it's at $1.5 million between now and when you know we go into construction in theory, you know, next summer, our next fall. The market, no one really knows what the market is going to do. So if the market cools off, then that won't provide a million dollars. You know, we'll see less in escalation cost. And so it's anyone's guess, but just as a metric, you could say alright maybe it's 750,000 of that is ameliorated by more favorable market conditions. But that's a that's a guess and not in our control. Sean. Craig is it right that the current number is sort of the midpoint of the two cost estimates that we received from RB, RLB and fantasy. Yes, they were actually pretty close, you know, within a percent of each other where where they thought we're going to go. If they were clear they do not think the market's going to reverse, we won't ever see a building that costs less than what we would get today. What, you know, there is some hope in the industry that things will, instead of continuing to escalate at the steep curve that it will taper off and escalate at a slower pace. Yeah, Alex, I'm sorry. I had a question actually about the, the FF&E budget.  So, if we have to, if we make a decision and we're hiring designers, right, to this budget of, you know, 1.5 million, and then in two years somebody comes in and says, you know, I'll pay for what you need for furniture, like, I don't know how that works like I don't know whether that is because we're actually using designers so I guess, I don't know if that would happen it would be lovely but I'm just curious how that might work should someone miraculously want to pay for all our furniture. Greg? Oh, I don't have any, I don't have any particular insight into that. I mean, we would have a plan from the designers. Yeah, and then we have to pay them again for a new plan or could we just magically, you know, give Sharon like a wish list and she just starts picking furniture like what is like what does that look like. Sorry, I sort of misunderstood the question. Yeah, so the design will include a layout and that layout will be filled mostly with existing furniture and then some new pieces and say important areas, and then if the town comes upon sort of a windfall of money or someone makes a donation or the market changes significantly. What we could do is that you'd pay the design team a little bit more money and then they would redo their plans with more new furniture. But yes, it would be an additional cost of design to switch that out. I like the Sharon wish list. I'll be honest, I think at that point if the building's underway. Me too. I get some things having the designers design but if it comes down to actually just the furniture itself. We should have a conversation whether whether we would need the architects for that. And actually part of the furniture and equipment design fee is a specialist who goes and they'll actually pick out the exact pieces of furniture and you know help with the procurement of them. And to put it in perspective, the design fees, even though it's not formalized yet but it's around $100,000. And so that's sort of the magnitude of costs. And I assume that in the future, more money is available. It would be less than $100,000 to have them redo their plans and add to their procurement package. So let's take up this FF&E and design thing when we're next together and Craig if you could give us some more concrete answers to the questions that Alex asked about like what, what is that involved what is that would be helpful. Sure. I still want to get clear because I think it's important for everybody to get clear. Based on what we just did, which is 1.9 and a potential $1 million cut that we have not yet approved. What is the estimate of the cost of going forward with the building, the so point so called midpoint estimate total, including soft costs and anything else. What is that number. I can let me quickly calculate. Don't forget our 200 grand or 250 we're going to get for that, that roof. Right so. I don't know what the number is but there is another there is another big number else. Not taking into account the the synthetic slate savings. So not taking that into account the, but taking into account the value engineering items that we just approved. And the reduced front F and E budget. We would be at the midrange 46.5 million total project cost. So that's hard costs and soft costs. The low end. The low end would be 43.5 million. And the high end. And the high end would be 1.8 million. Okay, so I was hoping that Sean would help us understand how key things about these figures because the figure that he presented to the finance committee was substantially different, I believe. Yeah, it was high or so, and I was going to correct the same thing. I mean, I can only imagine the difference would be in the soft cost estimate and if you have a better soft cost estimate. I'm happy to use that going forward but my figures were based on the reconciled hard cost estimate, which was originally 38.2 million. And then I subtracted out what we had for original reduction, which was 1.7 so that I would have to adjust for that. So I would use for soft costs or the rough percentage that we had in the budget so our soft cost percentage was 35% of construction. We had for soft costs so I applied that same 35% acknowledging that the soft cost is a, you know, it's not an estimate that we got from an independent cost estimator. So I arrived between those two, between those two at 49.3 million for total project costs. That includes a $1.7 million reduction so if there's another million, million two or so based on what we did today. That would get me down to 48.1 but again if you're telling me you have a better method or a more accurate way of estimating soft costs, we can adjust that. Okay, so what I did Sean so on Tuesday. I did not have time to sort of go through and do any deeper dive, but then on Wednesday what I did is I took a more granular look at those soft costs, and that's where that's how I produced the numbers I just quoted. Okay, so I could you send that. Could we get a break. Could I ask just for a breakdown of that at some point so we can include it. Okay, thank you. Yeah, I think it would do what I was going to say Sean and crag is I think it would be great if you guys got together and kind of reconcile your numbers, because I think what we have now is a lot of different numbers floating out to nobody's fall there just a lot of different numbers, and it would be good if that the opm who works for the town and the finance director could kind of agree on what the number is or at least identify if they're going to be points of disagreement, what what they are. So if you could do that, that would be, that would be really great. Absolutely. All right, thank you Sean thanks for the work you did for the, for the finance finance committee. Craig anything else from you. No sir. Okay. So if it is okay before we go to the report from the design to the design subcommittee and the outreach subcommittee, I wonder if we could hear from our wonderful town manager. Is that okay with everybody. Paul it's nice to see you so I apologize for being late. Not not not a problem. We had on the agenda item number three the town managers report on the project status. And we wondering if you would give us the time managers report on the project status and then Alex has some questions for you. Okay. Well the status is quo. The, you know we, before we move to the next step we have to sign contracts. You know we've had the conversation about with our town attorney about the memorandum of understanding between the town and the trustees. We've had conversations with members of the town council, obviously. And they believe it it'll be on their agenda for Monday's meeting as well. So we want to I want to make sure that we have a strong solid funding plan. I'm interested in hearing the strategy approach by the fundraising committee. And I think, you know, there's a lot of things that are in in play right now people are working on multiple different levels at the state level to get the MVLC to own up to what its share is and things like that. So I think we're everybody's working really hard to make sure this project moves forward. Great. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Paul. So the question one question that was asked earlier and Alex I'm going to voice the question which I think you asked but but but if I get it wrong is do you have a pretty clear sense of when the decision that will be made about going forward or not going forward. You know what I said at the finance committee meeting was that we need to be expeditious about our decision making and that means we're talking about weeks not months. And because we know that every, you know, Alex has really said this every day it's ticking up and we all are acutely aware of that. And so we want to be moving forward on it and feel comfortable that we can again it's it's for for me it's all about the finance and making sure we have a sustainable project and also contemplating what happens if the project doesn't succeed what are the economic consequences of that. Yep. Okay, Alex. I had to move my screen. I feel like it's a release the crack and hey Paul. Hi. How you doing. Good. So, yeah, so I timeline. Absolutely. I guess I'm, I'm just trying to figure out what the rules of the game are to go forward and I'm trying to figure out my, my, I don't, you know, I understand the fund funding plan totally makes sense to me but there are elements of this that obviously wouldn't be called fundraising if we had the money in hand right so I mean there are certain elements were not going to be able to get to but you know, we do know that we have literally people who professionally fundraise we have our state and federal legislators behind us at 1000% to move this forward. You know, we know there's still ARPA money out there we know that we're getting assistance from both our state and federal legislators about grants that we're not even aware of, you know, in terms of being able to access. You know, whether it's through the arts and humanities or the national down like there are, there's money out there that they know more than we do and so I, and we won't know if we get them we know that they're available and so I, like, I don't know that anybody's going to be able I'm just trying to figure out the waiting each week and the dollar figures going up for me as a trustee right I don't take lightly putting our endowment up at all at all and ultimately for me. I'm not going to make that decision because I am convinced that could be wrong, but I'm convinced that not moving forward, the library is going to be a bigger jeopardy financially because of the cost of the building because of where we'll fall in town and you know, either town's going to pay more than they are today, or we're going to have to take it out of our endowment to repair the building but neither of those situations seem tenable to me. And so, for me, every delay that we're taking is more that we the trustees are taking on for our fundraising so I really really wanted it, whether it's yes or no, I hope it's yes, but like, it's just getting more and more difficult to fundraise and so my concern is, we know we don't have project we know we don't have cost certainty until we hit that bid, right. And so, who needs what to make that decision to have that certainty. And, you know, as a trustee, I'm willing to make certain commitments to move the project forward, but I'm less, if it's not in my control so either we're both making commitments together. Right, you're committing I'm committing and we're controlling the process together, or you're committing and you control the process or what you know what I'm saying so I'm having difficulty with us potentially saying sure we'll write a check for $2 million to get us to bid but then I'm not controlling it going forward. I don't know whether that means towns, taking some of that as well so they have skin in the game so it doesn't make sense for them to pull back or whether we come up with sort of concepts around, you know, the project can exceed x or we like whatever it is like there needs to be so I just Right, so I hear you on that so you said yes or no I mean no is an easy answer and that's can be done quickly we don't want to go there that we're we're we're understanding that that's that's not the desired outcome. But there are some to get to yes is a longer process. And I think that, you know, having that discussion with the trustees about what are you, what is the expectation there in terms of what you're willing to support. The idea is in is in the game on this with the, you know, the costs that we've incurred to date town owns that we recognize that there's no request to the trustees for those, those funds. You know, so it's the next phase and we want to be pretty clear about what happens, you know, in any eventuality the last demo you did not anticipate a project that did not move forward we need to anticipate that in our next demo you and we've been working with our town attorney to get that kind of language and sharing that out. So, you know, you're if you're you're saying well how long is this all going to take right that's that's the key thing. And I think it's, again, I can't give you a exact date but I can say it's forefront and all of our minds and trying to move it fast and fear fast and furious, but fast forward as quickly as possible is really where we want to go. Again, I'm not saying we're not waiting where I'm talking about weeks and not months to finalize where we need to be. And a lot of the people have to make decisions the trustees have to make decisions manager, right. Right, and to make decisions. I feel like I don't have all the information that I need to make a decision right and when you say the town's got skin in the game right.  But we understand we have to return that. Okay, all right. No, that's those are donations I've been made that in with the anticipation of their being a success. We assume. I mean, maybe the people who donate that money will say keep it but my assumption is that those donors would expect that funds back. Sean is that your expectation. Yeah, no, that's definitely the expectation and I was just going to add that the MOU that we're working on now Alex I think we'll clearly lay out what you're asking for. That's one of the part of the feedback we've received is that it lay out those decision points and and what you know what circumstances the project would move forward and what circumstances they might not. So that's why it's taken a little bit of time because it's it's got to kind of consider those different scenarios. And then I would have all the time in the world of time or money and that's that's the part that's, you know, and, and again, you know, the clarity is so important because the dollar number that we're trying to raise right the fact that we've raised what we've raised with the project uncertainties speaks volumes about the group that we have working on our fundraising but you know people aren't going to be reluctant to give large dollars if they think there's another point where this could go up and smoke right there's got to be project that everybody understands otherwise we're jeopardizing our ability to raise funds understand that I heard Alex say but again I may not be hearing her correctly. Is that Alex is raising the question about whether or not the financing of the next two phases should fall exclusively to the trustees is that right Alex. I'm raising the question of what either right. I'm yes, yes because I if it falls explicitly to us and then there aren't right there aren't controls around what that means that I'm not comfortable doing that right. If we're doing it so there's got to be either the two of us in it together on a moving forward basis or so I just want to understand the mechanisms of how it works. Great. Okay, any other questions for the town manager about the project update and thank you Paul so far, Xander. One more thing I would just add, I've heard Alex bring up before. If there is no new Jones library, like, if this project does not go through it does not mean that we don't have a library project right there are significant repairs and upkeep the need to happen. Others that are pressing matters. So I would just encourage that in whatever the MOU is that it is also stipulated that like, if our trustees are going to think so much money into the next two phases. Where is the money coming from, they are then tasked with repairing a building that they're stuck with. That's a really good point and Xander and something we have considered as well. Thank you Xander. Okay, any other questions to the town manager I, as I understand Paul what you said and I think it's important to say it again. There is work about on this project going on in many fronts. The town manager and the town council of finance committee. It was a meeting that Sharon, we talked about earlier with the state representatives today about state funding there's a letter that went from dear field that named Amherst that went to the governor for opera funds. So, and there's a trustees, the trustees will meet, hopefully soon to discuss where the trustees stand on all of this. So there are a lot of people, the finance director, the finance committee. I have a question you may not be able to answer but again I it's just inspired by Alex is there is a finance committee meeting schedule. There's a town meeting, but town council meeting on the 12th is a finance committee and then there's a town council meeting on the 19th. Is that the point at which one thinks a decision is likely to be made, or is it likely to be much beyond that and if the answers you really don't know because you've said it's weeks. Yeah, I mean I don't want to predict what the council will do that would be the council president who should do that. Okay. Thank you so much Xander are you is that the same question or a different one. I apologize. It was the same question I put my hand down. I also I'm going to have to just connect for just a minute here. Okay. Thank you Xander. Christine, make sure it's a rainbow. You're muted Christine. My question is for Craig and your lovely timeline. So with all this talk. And if there was like a, I heard town council meeting on the 19th, you know so it sounds like it may not be till maybe the end of the month when things are actually all coming together and what does that do to our schedule like is that the patchmark stuff you had in or does it have to expand even more to get into DD. Great. It would continue to slide. So basically, for each week that we have not given the design team direction to move into DD. It's a sort of week that gets tacked on to each step. So overall duration stays the same but it just slides further into the future. So on your timeline. What is the date that you're assuming we move on. I haven't made an assumption about that I'm just showing sort of where we are today, you know show quickly. If you know and I understand that this is not the process but if you know tonight. The town directed by gold Alexander to move into design development. This is how things would look these striped lock and striped shapes. So, you know they've got six weeks more kind of rework that needs to be done to sort of or it can be rolled into design development. So let's just say the development would end in February of 2023 construction documents would end in September of 2023 and so on. So this is, if we give them the go ahead today is what it looks like, if it's another week if it's another month, it just everything moves out by that week or by that month. We're looking at a minimum of three weeks right now. Is that what I'm hearing from people to present where about five weeks behind schedule at present but that's, I'm trying to get you're saying snapshot today. If town keeps having to work through all these important options. If it isn't till the end of September that we get to go ahead from the town and everybody's in agreement, then that those blue stripes push out another. Right, another four weeks, another four weeks. Yeah. If I may Christine pick up on a point that you. I think that is implied this goes to what Alex was talking about. So let's look at that chart to make sure that we understand that if we go forward if the town decides and the trustees decide to go forward to bid documents. When would we write if we were making the decision right now when would we get those bids. The very end of 2023 so the end of December 2023. Again, end of December so if we're a month from now it'll be the end of January at the best. Exactly. Right, so we're into maybe 2024 before a decision, another decision would be would be made. And at that point again Paul and Shawn but Paul at that point if if they needed to be new borrowing. Or would that then require what would that require in terms of town decision. It would require a few. I'll go ahead also.  And then I'd go have to go back to the council for a vote so you know you're probably talking a minimum of three weeks for that process. Right Alex so that's your that's the answer the other part of your question about like, what is the decision going to look like and it looks like at this point. At the earliest we're going to be in the late winter or early spring of 2024. Okay. Any other questions for the man Christine are you. Christine you have a question. All right, nothing else for the manager. Thank you Paul. Thanks for the work that you and Shawn and everybody in the town is doing in all the combat conversations I want to reiterate what Alex said we're incredibly grateful to the people who have put in an incredible amount of time in the fundraising and we're incredibly grateful to the many many citizens in Amherst who have donated pledge worked for supported this this project and as we're all well aware Alex made this point. It's not a question of what we do for the library. It's not a question of whether we do something for library it's a question of what we do to deal with the needs of the library. Okay. Christine next item report from the design committee. I don't really have anything more to we went over the value management list and we do not have another meeting scheduled. Great. Thank you so much. Alex anything from outreach. Nope. Not this time. Okay. Sharon I was going to ask you when is our next scheduled meeting. You know, so our next schedule meeting we have been meeting on the on Tuesdays. That Tuesday is difficult for me could we meet on the 22nd of September at four o'clock does that work. That's a third that's two weeks from today. We have a we have a building in facilities meeting. I don't know if Sharon I don't know if we can reschedule I can try and reschedule that because this would take priority for me over that. Yeah, Sharon, could we look to schedule our next jlbc meeting on the 22nd, which is a Thursday at four o'clock. And then reschedule and then reschedule be enough. Okay, hang on. Let me just make sure. Okay, jlbc the 22nd at four p.m. I say yes we could do that. Okay, so people would put in a jlbc meeting for the 22nd at four o'clock Sharon will and Angie will be in touch with everybody to make sure it's on their calendar. Okay. No correspondence. I know the only topic I knew of not it is made about the chair 49 advanced was a report on the meeting today, which Sharon gave concerning the efforts to secure state funding. Next is public comment. So we have eight attendees and again express our gratitude for your attendance. If anybody would like to speak make a public comment. Please signify by raising your virtual hand. Okay, I see no virtual hands. Again, thanks to all for coming. Thanks to Angie for setting it up and invoking the bakerman rule. I declare this meeting adjourned.


Good morning lab students! It is Monday April 6th. I just wanted to let you guys know that today I'm going to start grading your work from lab 8 and your work for lab 9 is available. Now for lab 9 it's again going to be do Sunday evening which is Easter and if you don't want to be working on Easter I suggest that you get started early on this work. I also suggest that you get started earlier because we're still having students who are having technical problems at the last minute and for those of you who had technical problems on lab 8 if you have not contacted me you need to contact me. Contacting me is a necessary first step in the process but I also want to let you guys know that it's not the last step in the process. When you contact me that you've had a technical issue you need to then monitor your emails or text messages from my replies back to help you with those issues and occasionally I may have to ask you some more questions in order to figure out what's going on and we may need to schedule a time where we can text or talk to sort of try and work through and come up with a solution. Just telling me you have a technical issue does not excuse you from getting the work done. So I'm going to be emailing students who did not get lab 8 done and trying to work with them to get the work done but it is late at this point so you need to work with me and we need to work through these issues so that you can get your work done on time in the future. If you do have any other questions please contact me I'm available I'm here for you I know I don't get to see you bright and early on Thursday morning but that doesn't mean that I'm not here to help you out with stuff. For those of you who have been sending questions and monitoring your emails and working with me that's a great job keep working on it and I look forward to continuing working with you in the weeks to come.


This is Rob Johnson, president of the Institute for New Economic Thinking. I'm here today with an old friend and mentor, colleague on congressional staff, Jamie Galbraith, who has been a professor for many years at the LBJ school at the University of Texas in Austin, done a tremendous amount of work on inequality, on the role of the state, modern monetary theory, you name it, he's got a perspective on it and usually a very fresh and innovative one. And as you know, the Institute for New Economic Thinking is meant to foment critical discourse and he's a key ingredient always has been since our inception. So in Texas, you've just been through what you might call a vivid breakdown in the infrastructure, the social system and how would I put it? I'll bet you guys had a big run to the sporting goods sort of by hockey skates and things like that. What happened in Texas? What really broke the electrical system and the hospitals and everything? What broke the system was the structure of the electricity market as established by free market economists, including one in particular who took credit for the design, the guy by the name of professor William Hogan of the Kennedy School at Harvard, who was quoted in the New York Times reportedly saying that the system was working as designed and I think he was right. It was working exactly as it was designed. It was designed to the benefit of the generating companies to the benefit of the fossil fuel companies and to the benefit of the politicians that they funded. And we had a mythology of free market competition and what Texans learned was what does that mean in practice? What it means in practice is that without regulatory standards, the generating companies try to do everything on the cheap and so they don't weather rise because after all, Texas is warm most of the time and a hard freeze like this maybe happens once a decade. So you know the nine years and 51 weeks out of the decade they get away with it but then that one week happens when they don't and when they don't, two things happen. One is you get an increase in demand because demand is extremely inelastic. It doesn't respond to price but it does respond to weather and secondly you get a collapse of supply because the equipment freeze up and that was mostly natural gas, some renewables as well but mostly natural gas, all of which could and should have been weatherized because obviously most of the country knows how to weatherize electrical equipment. Chicago doesn't freeze up in a bad storm so it's not like it's rocket science. It just wasn't done because the companies didn't want to do it and they weren't made to and the result of the since electrical demand and supply have to balance. It's not a question of the prices making the balance, they have to balance. When the supply falls off they had to cut everybody out and then there's another problem. Then you go over to what is essentially necessarily a kind of socialist allocation of the supplies. That tells you you have critical infrastructure, critical hospitals in particular and they tend to be concentrated.  I didn't lose power because I share lines with hospitals but the fact that I had that good fortune meant that many people in the city didn't get power back at all for days, days and days, 60 hours from four days sometimes. If you don't do that in the temperature between 10 and 20 degrees or below 10 degrees Fahrenheit, your pipes freeze and so enormous costs, destruction of people's homes and just damage, water damage as well as the psychological damage and in some cases the physical damage is simply being dark and cold and hungry was inflicted on people as a result of this system. It was an absolutely textbook case on how free markets break down if there's not adequate regulation. And the context of the lockdown and the pandemic, which you might call the anxiety, is already at the top of the charts. That makes it very, very disorienting. The pandemic certainly complicated things to a degree. I'm sure that's true. But I have to say I was impressed by the extent to which people were prepared to step out and take risks. The responsive ordinary people was really, really remarkable but you know you are just talking about a lot of people who have no place to go and huddle in the dark. Now we talked a little bit earlier just about the themes related to inequality and their cause but the inequality in the access or the quality of health care is another theme that we hear a lot about these days. Is that just he who has money can buy or what's the nature of the challenge especially when, how would I say, you being infected harms me. There's a there's a profound externality in this system. What do we need to do to put things on a better platform both from a humanistic point of view and a recognition of our interdependence? Well one way to look at this is to ask about which countries handled this pandemic effectively in which did not. What you find of course is that the countries that did and some of them are socialists and some of them are capitalist. What they had in common was that they had maintained a public health capacity. So they were ready on the first day which was like the third of January when the first reports came in. They were ready to close their airports. They were ready to mobilize cabinet committees and to set up protocols for acting on this. That was true in Korea, it was true in Taiwan, it was true in Singapore, Hong Kong was true within a few days and then in mainland China itself. It's true in Vietnam and those countries actually suppressed the virus. New Zealand did too and then you have the countries which are wealthier by and large like ourselves, the British and some of the Europeans where the health care system is highly structured to the kinds of ailments that rich people, rich populations have, chronic diseases, diabetes, heart diseases and so forth. The public health element was very, very rundown. Public health was a very minor piece of medical education. The funding for it was cut. The preparatory committee and the White House had been dissolved and so they had nothing to offer except turn it over to a very decentralized system of governors and mayors to try and manage and call on private corporations to do what they could and the thing fell apart and so we got clobbered and the best we could do was to keep it from going to the whole population all at once. We could only slow the spread and lost a half a million people so far waiting for the vaccines to come and put an end to it. A terrible example. So what we need to do is to realize that we're not immune from public health crises and we need to have a public health service. Now the other issue that you were talking about is paying for people's health care. That's of course another separate issue and obviously we need to have the whole business of private health insurance is not up to dealing with the kinds of problems that we have. So I'm all in favor of a single payer system but a single payer system is not itself adequate to deal with a public health crisis. You need to have the capacity to mobilize the population to handle all of the kinds of behavioral changes and protective measures that are necessary. Some countries did it. We can see that some countries did it and what they got for it what they got was you know fatality rates that were in the hundreds are the low thousands not 500,000. And in the event that you were what we call a fiscal hawk they locked down and their economies came back sooner. Correct. And so the need for fiscal stimulus was of less depth and shorter duration. That's absolutely correct. I mean they realized that if you dealt with a public health problem you can get the economy back. We got the worst we we stalled and it's an exponential process. You know the thing multiplies it so a few days a few weeks and you are in very deep trouble because it moves very fast on you. So you have to move quickly. You have to move in an uncompromising way. And then you've got the benefit that you grow out of it much sooner. I think that's a clear lesson that even an economist can absorb. What has surprised you? What have you been pleasantly surprised by? What have you been haunted by? What do you wish you were seeing in light of all the challenges that sit before us now? Well an economist is not normally pleasantly surprised by anything because the discipline focuses on the tension on the real problems. And this is a very interesting time to be an economist if you have your eyes open and if your brain is still functioning which is unfortunately the minority situation in the field. But if you go back a dozen years the period that we're living through that we started living through really with the onset of the of the great financial crisis in 2007 is one which ought to be revolutionizing finally the entire field. Because it is a series of developments for which the approaches that have been dominant for a generation or more are completely inadequate. They were inadequate to either anticipate or to deal with the financial meltdown as they didn't incorporate the critical perspectives that go back to Keynes and Minsky on those questions. They did not and have not been effective or useful in confronting climate change because they do not incorporate the basic physics and biophysics of resources and the capacity of the environment to absorb emissions which are fundamental which are raised in the early 1970s by Nicholas Georgesco Regan and that simply never never penetrated into mainstream economic discourse. And they have I think utterly misrepresented the role of markets as against organizations and regulations in the society. So this is an area where where my father's work over many years is relevant. And again we have an economics profession which has basically laid aside the work of almost all of the truly important people of the previous period and finds itself incapable of dealing with with the crucial questions that we're that we actually face. Yeah yeah so vis-a-vis how would I say the Trump administration and then the follow-on the Biden administration here in the United States. Do you see Trump as a coincidence an aberration or did he somehow organically arise from the pressures and the despair that were going on in the economy? Well I think it's clear that that Trump himself was a symptom of developments that had been a long time in the works. One way to look at this is that at the start of our careers when we were both on on Capitol Hill mid-70s to the mid-80s in my case this was a crucial moment when the United States made a decision through the implementation of monetary policy that through what Paul Volcker and Ronald Reagan did to sacrifice its industrial heartland to its financial sector. And what grew up out of that was an economy which is prosperous on on the east coast as a result of the basically the power the global power of the financial sector, prosperous on the west coast as a result of the the development of advanced technology and a number of other things aerospace and information aerospace entertainment on the west coast. And in between in grave difficulty and particularly the midwest the upper midwest the heartland has simply not effectively recovered from the from from that transition in the early 1980s. And the result of that is of course people who are now who were once working in in that part of the country and are now probably mostly fairly elderly and many others are very very disenchanted and they were open they were open to Donald Trump's appeal which had an enormous amount of myth associated with it. But the reason Trump was elected was that he was able to bring over a fair number of people who said to themselves well he's at least he's saying things that we understand that the Democratic Party is not saying and he is rejecting things that the Democratic Party has perpetrated including of course trading agreements and then everything else from this. It's not entirely fair to the Democrats because it really goes back to Reagan, but it was a real phenomenon Trump was the outcome of it not the not not the progenitor. Yeah and he I remember saying the system is rigged it was like his mantra the system is rigged and everybody said oh I haven't heard that in a long time people forget he beat 15 Republicans before. I haven't I haven't forgotten that. And I'll never forget a gentleman who has the Dilbert cartoon Scott Adams wrote a blog post and gave a speech one time about how I took all these classes on hypnosis and learning and communications and he and Steve Jobs were friends and watch out for this guy Trump and about a month after finding that quizzical kind of you know wow Donald Trump or this guy really thinks he's serious I watched him in Florida panel of 16 guys sitting next to Jeb Bush and Jeb Bush said something we criticized Trump and everybody cheered and Trump said something back and everybody booed and Trump looked at the TV camera and he said ladies and gentlemen you may think Jeb Bush was a popular governor here and he was and that's for some of the cheering but what you got to understand is those people cheering and booing at this debate they are the donors those are the people who are rigging the game here those are the Republicans who are getting paid for their support in politics those are the people you and I have to defeat and I just sat back and I said wow this guy wants the nomination for president and he just took on the RNC about the donors I said this is a different cut of fish he is breaking away from what okay well there was no question they did I think I mean we're now in 2021 and I think Donald Trump is my view was a spent political force yes that the general collapse that occurred over the last year has you know drained the aura that surrounded him and the extraordinary upheaval in in January has got to have caused you know reflection even amongst some of those most dedicated backers but the underlying issues there are we're real and of course he took a certain amount of political talent which was authentic to exploit them we're now in a new phase climate change was coming on stream as he was deregulating and defying the Paris Accord and secondly his tax cuts and deregulation were really which might call a seducing abandon a bait and switch vis-à-vis the people he inspired to vote for him oh yeah I'm not so sure I think what happened if you look at the at the broad aggregates was that there was a slow steady highly inertial expansion that began after the after the financial crisis on 2009 and it continued at about that same pace if it was losing steam early in the Trump term it was probably sustained to a degree by the by the tax cuts and that carried on until the early part of 2020 when the pandemic crushed it yes and so you know the the the important thing though is is is not there it's that a the the formula that Trump offered no longer carries any conviction nobody believes that they were going to have a successful development of the economy from that foundation and nobody believes that we're going to have a successful development from what came before all right nobody this everybody understands that the reason we got Trump was that the in the Obama administration there was a kind of half-hearted insufficient approach to a serious problem there was not a structural approach and and of course if there had been it would have been there wasn't the political capacity to get it enacted so the fact that the you know the the Obama people pulled their punches has created a situation which surprises me in which President Biden has a margin of maneuver and a conviction about what needs to be done that shows that he really did live through this period and remembers it now which to me is very much to his credit because we're now seeing even from some of the same people a very different approach they're they're saying in effect we have to put forward a program which is adequate to the challenges that we face and we'll do it in two phases we will get people through the pandemic with a very substantial program of income support and support for state and local governments and this kind of thing and then we'll move and we'll try and deal with with the larger structural questions which are going to which we're going to face this to me is it's a major breakthrough in thinking at least for democrats one of the things one remembers again it's good to be on the on this with a with a fellow geyser because we're old enough to remember that in 1981 when Ronald Reagan and his crew came in they demanded the moon they they they put put forward a tax cut which is their major agenda that was one-third of the income tax roughly no that was that was that was froth Murray Wiedenbaum who was Reagan's economic chief economic advisor said you know to friends it's a liberal friends he said like we're really clever we've got our Keynesian stimulus in place before the re-election uh you know they knew what they were doing but the point was they got a very big program through the congress plus a very big increase in the military budget so it's a Keynesianism on both sides and when it proved to be more than they needed well they they were able to make some concessions and you've got tax increases in 82 and 84 that were actually very large by the grammar hollings and well I've never in tefra yeah yeah these these two tax bills um and then ultimately the tax reform of 86 but the things that they did and before he was reelected were substantial um and you know they could give that back so they look they they one coming and going uh that's a political lesson which Joe Biden is old enough and has been around long enough to have recognized and it really transformed things to have the democrats playing this game saying we're going to go and and do it we're going to put the kitchen sink into this we're going to put everything we have on the table uh and uh you know when we get it if it turns out I don't think there will be a problem frankly uh because the whole notion that there we're in some kind of you know inflation inflation prone situation is absurd to my mind but uh if there were such a problem you can deal with it when the problem comes up deal with the problem that's in front of you and don't anticipate ones that might or might not emerge in three or four years right I mean there's a sense especially when the pendulum of distribution meaning profits share relative to labor share the pendulum is rocked so far in one direction that if you compressed profit with wages coming up it wouldn't necessarily lead to inflation for quite some time well I mean inflation is when prices are now set and as they were not in the 1970s on a worldwide basis energy prices prices for consumer goods come in from imported from the rest of the world food prices are this is a world market so the ability of the united states to generate inflation is just much less and then back back in the day we had a you know what was the dynamic of wages and prices as a result of union wage settlements and the price of things like automobiles that were affected by union wage settlements and those those things are no longer major factors in the u.s economy so and then there's the fact that almost all of our jobs are services jobs and until the service workers don't have any any any very much wage setting power so it's just the different it's a non-inflationary situation the one price that can go up is land but land does not counter does and they price and as he said wasn't it's not going to price land and stock values and so forth but those things are aren't are they don't they don't show up this part of the consumer price index anyway so it it's very absurd very silly to be holding on to a model of the so-called philips curve that was generated 1960 an entirely different world yeah that as a basis for thinking about how things are going to happen now well you've been doing work systematic work for a very long time now on the questions of inequality and I know it's very evidence-based very empirical what kind of things have you seen change say since the time bill clinton came into power 1992 to the present which is 28 years what what's what are the structures like you mentioned more service workers more how we say price setting in the world economy globalization probably a deterioration of unions but paint a picture for us okay what's going on let's start let's start with the united states and the turning point that you mentioned is a pretty good place to start what happened in that period was a bifurcation of the american economy and you can see it very clearly if you look at the data as we do by region or by sector that the stratospheric incomes that define american income inequality were generated in banking they were generated in in finance generally speaking and they were generated in the technology sector which was a creature of the financial sector was other than how how does that done then is done through ipos and through basically through capital asset valuations and you look at this and you think i got a small number of people with an amazing amount of income and that's what inequality is we did a calculation for the late 1990s with using uh income recorded by county that's tax data and we found that if you took out five counties uh that um uh from the data and pretended that what had happened there hadn't happened the inequality across counties would for you know from those last years of the 1990s would have fallen by half on those five counties big surprise well what were they they were where where you may be sitting new york new york yeah right and then three counties in northern california san francisco santa clara and san matel and one county in washington state king county which is microsoft it's just extremely straightforward what was happening the problem fairfield county in connecticut which was a commuter to new york yeah that's in the top 15 i'm sure but but at least five it took out 15 it was basically the whole of it how you get any increase and what was happening was it was it was enormously concentrated capital asset inflation if you like and then you can look at the pattern in later years it differs defense contractors and real estate and so forth depending on what's going on but okay so that's the united states brian by and large a tremendous bifurcation as a result of the structural change in the economy with most people working in the service sector and just not seeing uh you know the anything not seeing much change really not seeing any great increases uh maybe not seeing enormous decreases either but there are certainly the level of inequality went up dramatically okay the bigger story is the world as a whole and what we uh you know we're able to establish and this is the real i think innovation and important aspect of our work is that uh they um you look at this the pattern of evidence for the for countries around the world and we have um about 150 countries in the data set going back to the 60s and you can see that the pattern of rise of inequality is driven by global finance it's uh you can see this in um in the early 1980s inequality goes up in the countries that are hit by the by the debt crisis late 1980s early 1990s it's the countries of the formerly socialist bloc that were collapsing of course inequality went up like a rocket there and then in the 1990s onward to disney asia which was going they're going liberalization so where countries liberalized where they were exposed to international finance where they were hit by debt crisis inequality goes up uh and in the after 2000 there's at least a pause of 12 15 years because a lot of countries retreated from the neoliberal model and they had strong commodity prices so you can see this is basically a global macroeconomic phenomenon and that's that's that's the the interesting thing because if you ask what the literature says about inequality it's all about labor markets it's all about technology education trade in one specific place and some other specific place and they never tie the story together to show a pattern that's that's determined across large regions continents or the world as a whole but frankly inequality is generated at the level of the world as a whole and that then comes back to my basic view which is that you know if you if you don't start your analysis of the world from a standpoint of a essentially monetary analysis rooted in canes uh you're not going to understand very much and hymen minsky how would i say had been prescient in that canesian kind of way innovated himself it wasn't really recognized until it was it had fully blossomed then people acknowledged his brilliance much more they're what they've acknowledged it but the question the question i would ask is uh going again going back to the to the financial crisis has been 13 years how many of the people who were right about this who had the right methodological perspective and who you know warned in advance that the financial system was unstable how many of them have been given appointments at the so-called top economics departments the answer is zero they haven't done it uh you know a few people who were already there occasionally give kind of a lip service nod but frankly the people the jobs still go to people who were who were wrong before and who are you know essentially clueless about what's going on now well thank you and let's sign off and we'll come back again in a few months and take the temperature again but i appreciate your time today and try to stay warm down there in texas