Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAboutSelect Board Meeting Packet - 02.08.21 #1Pages 2-38 Pages 39-73 Pg 74-87 Pages 88-89 Pages 90-95 Pages 96-119 Pages 120-197 COVID-19 RESPONSE COMMAND CENTER WEEKLY SITUATION REPORT Situation in Numbers Massachusetts current as of 2/4 507,166 Total Confirmed Cases (click here for more information) 14,489 Deaths among confirmed cases 13,955,444 tests for the virus conducted to date by MA State Public Health Laboratory, hospitals, and commercial laboratories. United States Last Updated 2/4 Case numbers are updated regularly at noon. Saturday/Sunday reports are preliminary and have not been confirmed with state/territorial health departments. Total Cases Reported to CDC: 26,277,125 Total Cases 445,264 Deaths 57 Jurisdictions Reporting Cases (50 states, D.C., Puerto Rico, Guam, Northern Marianas, Marshall Islands, American Samoa, and US V.I.) Social Distancing Basics:  Stay Home  Call/Facetime/online chat with friends and loved ones. If you go out for essential needs:  Avoid crowds  Stay 6 feet away from others  Don’t shake hands or hug  Wear a face covering or mask. Thursday, February 4, 2021 COVID -19 Command Center Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency Situation Update The Command Center Situation Report is published weekly. The next report will be published on Thursday, 2/11/21. In This Week’s Report: • Latest Data: Public Health Update • Week in Review: Key State Actions o Vaccine Online Booking Process o Children to Receive Additional Food Benefits o $174 Million in Grants, Increase Capacity Limits o DPH, Emergency Management, and Disaster Recovery Updates o Holyoke and Chelsea Soldiers’ Homes Weekly Update Helpful Links: • COVID-19 Vaccination Locations • When can I get the COVID-19 vaccine? • COVID-19 Vaccine in Massachusetts • Public Messaging Resources for Municipalities & Businesses • Mass.gov/findfoodhelp • HandHoldMA.org • Reopening Massachusetts • Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency • Unemployment & COVID-19 • Dept. Of Transitional Assistance Online Portal • COVID-19 Cost Eligibility and Tracking Guidance Governor Baker details the more than 120,000 new vaccination appointments being added this week as he tours the mass vaccination site at Fenway Park. This site is one of 125 vaccination locations statewide. COVID-19 RESPONSE COMMAND CENTER WEEKLY SITUATION REPORT Latest Data: COVID-19 Public Health Update Key indicators from today’s interactive dashboard are below. COVID-19 RESPONSE COMMAND CENTER WEEKLY SITUATION REPORT Weekly Public Health Report: The Command Center released the Weekly Public Health Report, with town by town information, including the weekly listing of city and town risk levels on Thursday, 2/4. The report also includes granular information on cases by county, biweekly testing rates, contact tracing information (including active COVID cluster information by Exposure Setting Type), hospitalization data, race and ethnicity data, information about cases in long term care facilities, and PPE distribution data. Week in Review: State Actions Command Center Announces More Details for Vaccine Online Booking Process On Wednesday, the Baker-Polito Administration provided an update on COVID-19 vaccination efforts and announced new vaccination locations across the Commonwealth. The Administration continues to expand Commonwealth’s vaccination infrastructure. There are currently 125 vaccination sites in Massachusetts, and the Administration expects this will ramp up to 165 sites by mid-February. Over 120,000 appointments will be made available over the course of this week. It is expected to take several weeks for residents to secure appointments due to limited supply of vaccines from the federal government. Residents can visit www.mass.gov/COVIDvaccine to check when they are eligible to get the vaccine, find an appointment at a location near them, and get ready for their appointment. Mass Vaccination Sites Each Thursday, new appointments will be available for the mass vaccination sites. This week, over 55,000 new appointments will go live for the following week. Residents can use the map or ZIP Code search tool to find a vaccination location near them at www.mass.gov/COVIDVaccine. In total, the Administration plans to stand up at least seven mass vaccination sites across the Commonwealth, to ensure every resident who wants a vaccine, has access. Reggie Lewis Center in Roxbury: In collaboration with the City of Boston, the vaccination site at the Reggie Lewis Center opened this week. This site is currently serving residents of Boston but will transition to being a mass vaccination site at the end of the month. Fenway Park in Boston: Fenway Park officially opened to the public on Monday, February 1. All eligible groups can get vaccinated at this location. By end of the day Tuesday, 1,200 doses have been administered at the site. About 500 doses per day are expected to be given each day this week. Next week, Fenway will ramp up to 1,000 doses a day, and for the week after that 1,250. The Administration expects this site to eventually ramp up to do about 8,000 doses a week. Gillette Stadium in Foxboro: Opened on Friday, January 15. To date, 23,000 doses have been administered. COVID-19 RESPONSE COMMAND CENTER WEEKLY SITUATION REPORT DoubleTree Hotel in Danvers: Today, the Double Tree Hilton Hotel in Danvers opened to the public, serving all eligible priority groups. The Administration expects 500 doses to be administered today. Eastfield Mall in Springfield: The Eastfield Mall in Springfield opened on Friday, January 29. To date, 2,741 doses have been administered. Mass vaccination sites are listed as large red stars on the map at www.mass.gov/COVIDvaccine. Pharmacies Pharmacies including Walgreens and CVS Health post appointments daily, totaling over 15,500 per week. Retail pharmacy sites like Stop and Shop and Hannaford and Topco sites including Wegmans, Big Y and Price Chopper post 4,600 appointments weekly. The COVID-19 Response Command Center is also working to set up sites in the communities hardest hit by COVID-19. This week, 8 new Walgreens sites opened in some of these communities: 2 sites in Mattapan, 2 sites in Roxbury, Dorchester, Chelsea, Revere, Everett. A community vaccination site also opened in Brockton, which is being run by their local board of health. Next week, under the Retail Pharmacy Partnership Program CVS Health will open an additional 30 pharmacy sites primarily in areas that have been disproportionately impacted by COVID. This effort will add 21,000 appointments, which will come online in the next week or so. Pharmacy and grocery vaccination locations are listed as blue stars on the map at www.mass.gov/COVIDvaccine. Other Providers Other provider sites including healthcare locations and local vaccination sites will make over 57,000 appointments available over the course of this week. These sites include: Community Health Centers, Medical Centers, Hospital Providers, and community vaccination clinics operated by local health departments. On the map at www.mass.gov/COVIDvaccine, health care locations are listed as green stars and local vaccination clinics operated by local health departments are listed as yellow stars. $174 Million in Grants to 4,043 Additional Small Businesses for COVID Relief, Increases Capacity Limits for Businesses and Other Activities Today, approximately $173.9 million in awards to 4,043 additional small businesses in the sixth round of COVID relief grants administered by the Massachusetts Growth Capital Corporation (MGCC). This program is focused on serving businesses that have been most impacted by the pandemic, including restaurants, bars, caterers, personal services, and independent retailers. The Administration also announced that effective Monday, February 8th at 5:00 AM, businesses can operate at 40% capacity. This is an increase from an existing order limiting capacity to 25% for many businesses that expires Monday. COVID-19 RESPONSE COMMAND CENTER WEEKLY SITUATION REPORT Beginning when the order expires, restaurants and close contact personal services will also be allowed to operate at a 40% capacity limit. Additionally, the Administration announced that current restrictions limiting gathering sizes to 10 persons indoors and 25 persons outdoors would remain in place for the present time. All other orders and safety guidance remain in place throughout the Commonwealth as the state continues to fight COVID-19 and vaccination ramps up in all regions. COVID-19 SMALL BUSINESS GRANT PROGRAMS To date, the Baker-Polito Administration has awarded more than $450 million in direct financial support to 9,900 small businesses. This funding has been made available through a $668 million business relief fund set up in December, as well as a $50.8 million fund for small and diverse businesses included in the economic recovery package announced in October. In parallel with the awards announced today, MGCC is engaging with applicants to the Small Business and Sector-Specific Grant Programs that meet sector and demographic priorities but are missing certain documents that are necessary to be considered for an award. Those applicants will be contacted beginning today, February 4th, and MGCC will work with those businesses over the coming weeks to finalize their applications. SECTOR-SPECIFIC CAPACITY RESTRICTIONS Effective Monday, February 8th at 5:00 AM, those businesses and other sectors in Massachusetts currently limited to 25% capacity following an across the board capacity reduction on December 26, 2020 will be permitted to increase to a 40% capacity limit. Businesses and activities affected by the adjustment include: • Arcades and Recreational Businesses • Driving and Flight Schools • Gyms/Health Clubs • Libraries • Museums • Retail • Offices • Places of Worship • Lodging (common areas) • Golf (indoor areas) • Movie Theaters (no more than 50 people per theater) In addition, restaurants and close contact personal services will now be allowed to operate at a 40% capacity limit, which reflects an increase from the 25% limit imposed in December. As under the current 25% limit, workers and staff will not count towards the occupancy count for restaurants and close contact personal services. The Commonwealth remains in Phase 3, Step 1 of the Baker-Polito Administration’s reopening plan. Phase 3, Step 2 businesses, including indoor performance venues and indoor recreation businesses like roller rinks and trampoline parks, remain closed. GATHERING LIMITS The current gathering limits, in place since December 26, are being extended. Indoor gatherings and events will remain limited to 10 people. Outdoor gatherings and events will remain limited to 25 people. The gathering limits apply equally to private homes, event venues, and other public spaces. Click here to read the read the updated gatherings order. COVID-19 RESPONSE COMMAND CENTER WEEKLY SITUATION REPORT Important Updates Department of Public Health Updates: • Commissioner Bharel did a series of TV and radio interviews today on vaccine safety, the increasing availability of appointments, the new variants, and keeping to your household for Super Bowl gatherings. View the WBZ TV interview here. • “Trust the Facts, Get the Vax,” the new public information campaign will air this weekend during the Super Bowl pregame show, with a :30 sec video on vaccine safety recorded with MA physicians. This was a project of the Governor’s Office and MHA with assistance from DPH. • The COVID-19 vaccine website has been revamped to improve user experience for locating vaccination sites and making appointments at www.mass.gov/covidvaccine. • The weekly public health report publishes on Thursdays at 5pm with city and town data. Look for it here. • DPH issued an Order regarding vaccine reporting to the Massachusetts Immunization Information System (MIIS) • DPH issued a Bulletin – What Massachusetts COVID-19 Vaccine Providers Need to Know, for the week of 1/28. This Bulletin offers the Latest Numbers, Who to Vaccinate This Week, What to Know This Week, Where to go when you have questions about COVID-19 vaccination, and Resources and Learning Opportunities. • DPH Epidemiology Line handled 560 COVID-19 calls and 80 non-COVID-19 calls for a total of 640 calls from 1/18 through 1/24. • MA211 received 6,525 calls from Monday 1/25 through Sunday 1/31 for a new total of 205,738. • DPH received Cycle 10 allocations on 2/3 as follows: Bamlanivimab 100 doses and Regeneron 0 doses due to a repackaging project being conducted by the supplier. This allocation is for a two-week period. The Therapeutics Working Group is recommending an equitable allocation strategy. • As of 2/2/21, the Academic Public Health Volunteer Corps has 298 volunteers supporting 52 local boards of health. For more information about the Academic Public Health Volunteer Corps, please visit the APHVC webpage on Mass.gov. • DPH issued updated Long Term Care Visitation Guidance. This updated guidance provides modifications to the conditions for visitation, communal dining, and group activities. • DPH issued updated guidance for BinaxNOW Rapid Point of Care COVID-19 Testing for Long-Term Care Facilities, extending the BinaxNOW test kit distribution of 8 tests per bed for long-term care facilities for the months of February and March. • DPH issued updated guidance for Preventing COVID-19 Infections and Use of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) in BSAS-licensed/contracted Programs. • Due to decreasing COVID -19 cases and hospitalizations, improving hospital capacity, and a diminishing for daily load balancing, HMCC Regions 1, 2, 3, and 4 will be moved to Tier 3, effective 2/8. This modification is made in accordance with the DPH COVID-19 Resurgence Planning and Response Guidance for Acute Care Hospitals. HMCC Region 5 remains in Tier 4 as the hospitals in the region continue to respond to capacity constraints. DPH and the COVID-19 Command Center will continue to work closely with all regions to support strategies to improve hospital capacity statewide. • For the date range of 1/22 – 1/28, 93 of 96 Massachusetts hospitals were 100% compliant in their COVID-19 data submissions to the DPH WebEOC portal which is submitted to the federal HHS Protect portal daily. • There are currently 14 Rapid Response Teams deployed to nursing homes across the Commonwealth. Teams are also helping nursing homes on the day of their Vaccine Clinics to ensure staff and residents are monitored after vaccination. • There are also 10 National Guard Teams deployed and supporting nursing and rest homes. COVID-19 RESPONSE COMMAND CENTER WEEKLY SITUATION REPORT • DPH has collaborated on the establishment of alternate medical sites (or “Field Medical Stations”) to mitigate stress on health care systems as cases increase. The Lowell General Hospital Alternative Care Site opened on 1/4/21, and the UMASS Memorial Medical Center DCU Center Field Hospital opened on 12/6/20. In addition, DPH has contracted with ambulance services in each of the five EMS Regions to help ensure transport capability to alternate medical sites. Emergency Management and Disaster Recovery Updates: Mass Care • 4 state contracted isolation/recovery hotels in the communities of Everett, Pittsfield, Taunton, and Wakefield continue to receive client placements: 128 individuals are currently housed in the program. o Top 5 referring cities:  Boston (302)  Worcester (183)  Springfield (160)  Cambridge (115)  Brockton (109) o To date, a total of 1,899 residents have been placed in these hotels for safe isolation and recovery, an increase of 48 since last week. Community Food Box Program Update (1/29 to 2/4): MEMA is partnering with the Salvation Army, and a vendor, to bring in shelf-stable food boxes each week to support communities in their effort to deliver food to individuals and families in quarantine and isolation who require assistance accessing food. Each week MEMA’s warehouse receives a delivery of shelf-stable food boxes. Distribution of food boxes is coordinated between MEMA and communities in need via a request through WebEOC. The table below reflects the current food box inventory, and number of food boxes distributed to communities during the weekly reporting period (data is updated every Friday). Total Number of Food Boxes in MEMA’s Inventory Total Number of Food Boxes Distributed to One or More Local Communities During the Reporting Period Total Number of Communities that Received Food Boxes During the Reporting Period 3,602 907 9 Logistics (including Personal Protective Equipment and Supplies) • 83 Orders prepared for pickup or delivery from the MEMA State Logistics Warehouse from 1/29-2/4. • Each of the hotels in Pittsfield, Wakefield, Everett, and Taunton were resupplied with needed equipment this week. • DPH coordinated 9 deliveries to health care entities on Monday (2/1) (3 PPE/1 testing supplies, 4 BinaxNOW kits and 1 therapeutic); 46 deliveries were made on Tuesday (2/2) (1 PPE/4 testing supplies and 41 BinaxNOW kits); 53 deliveries were made on Wednesday (2/3) (3 PPE/2 testing supplies, 47 BinaxNOW kits and 1 therapeutic); 29 deliveries were made on Thursday (2/4) (3 PPE/1 testing supplies and 25 BinaxNOW kits); and 18 deliveries have been scheduled for Friday (2/5) (4PPE/1 testing supplies and 13 BinaxNOW kits). Disaster Recovery On March 27, 2020, the President declared a Major Disaster Declaration for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts related to the COVID-19 pandemic response. Through this declaration, federal aid will be made COVID-19 RESPONSE COMMAND CENTER WEEKLY SITUATION REPORT available to cities and towns, state agencies, and certain non-profits in all Massachusetts counties to help pay for emergency protective measures (response costs) related to the COVID-19 pandemic. MEMA’s Recovery Unit has developed a webpage with information and guidance on, but not limited to, disaster declaration, eligibility criteria, and the application process. Highlights from the Disaster Recovery process include the following: • Online Applicant Technical Assistant Requests: 504 • Request for FEMA RPA Applicants: 662 • FEMA obligated the Executive Office of Health and Human Services Vaccination Program Expedited Project Worksheet at 100% Cost Share for $213,284,522.50 on February 2, 2021. • New project obligations (17): $217,406,413.40 • MEMA conducted state-wide Applicant webinar on 2/4/21 to review Public Assistance guidelines for COVID-19 vaccination expenses. Presentation PowerPoint, recording, and Q&A documents will be made available to all attendees and on MEMA’s website in the coming days. • MEMA is in the process of collecting non-congregate shelter data for 1/15-2/15 FEMA reporting period. • MEMA is coordinating with FEMA to obtain additional eligibility guidance for the new Presidential Executive Orders and memorandums. COVID-19 Cases in Long-Term Care (LTC) Facilities (as of 2/4) Residents/Healthcare Workers of LTC Facilities 34,105 LTC Facilities Reporting at Least One Case of COVID-19 421 Deaths Reported in LTC Facilities 8,187 COVID-19 RESPONSE COMMAND CENTER WEEKLY SITUATION REPORT Holyoke Soldiers’ Home Weekly Update (current as of 2/2/21) • Following the completion of Phase II of the Refresh Project, Veterans residing at Holyoke Medical Center since April 2020 have returned to the Soldiers' Home in Holyoke in a project known as Operation Bring’em Home. The refresh project is an important initiative to ensure infection control standards are met throughout the Soldiers’ Home in Holyoke. • CVS Health was on site at the Soldiers’ Home on January 19 to administer the second dose of the vaccine and to also vaccinate those who were not vaccinated in the first round. On December 29, the first veteran residents and staff at the Soldiers’ Home in Holyoke received the COVID-19 vaccination. CVS Health will be back at the Soldiers’ Home on February 9 to administer the second dose of the vaccine and will also provide vaccinations to those who were not vaccinated in the first round. o 111 veteran residents and 153 staff have received both doses. o 6 veteran residents and 84 staff received their first dose. • The Home is strongly encouraging all staff to receive the vaccine. Staff are being provided with educational information about the COVID-19 vaccine, including COVID-19 vaccine FAQ sheets, and the Nurse Education Team and Medical Team held vaccine informational forums. The materials are available in both English and Spanish. • Home Base, a partnership of the Red Sox Foundation and Massachusetts General Hospital, is extending their free veteran counseling offerings to our Soldier’s Home families and staff. • The Soldiers’ Home is working with Home Base, a veteran support organization, to help improve the quality of life, increase psychosocial interventions to address isolation during the pandemic. Home Base has linked us to virtual concerts provided by professional and amateur volunteers. The concerts are interactive—featuring musical performances and conversation between the Veterans and musicians. The concerts occur every Tuesday and Thursday afternoon. The team at Home Base is working with Social Work, Recreation and Nursing to provide other opportunities for virtual activities. • The Soldiers’ Home in Holyoke continues to prioritize virtual visitation and family communication as visitation and movement throughout the facility have been suspended and PPE protocols have been heightened, per infection control protocol, since November 20 for all units until further notice. Families are encouraged to continue video visits for regular family communication through video chat, and the Family Line is available for ad hoc updates with support from social work and clinical staff. Virtual visits can be scheduled by calling the Family Line at 413-552-4764 Monday - Friday 8:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m. Families can also request updates via email at CommunicationsMailbox-HLY@Mass.gov. Note: The Soldiers’ Home can only share medical information about a resident with the authorized health care proxy on file. • The Soldiers’ Home in Holyoke is taking every precaution to mitigate COVID-19 entering and spreading at the Soldiers’ Home in Holyoke. Based on guidance from DPH, and in consultation with infection control experts, the Home is continuing mandatory 2 times per week testing for all staff and residents. Increased testing frequency will allow us to detect COVID-19 early and will continue until the Home receives 14 consecutive days of negative results. o The Soldiers’ Home in Holyoke has been intently focused on following infection control procedures and maintaining best practices for the safety of veteran residents and staff. All veteran residents’ health is being monitored and retesting is being conducted for veterans both on- and off-site as clinically appropriate. The Soldiers’ Home’s medical team is making all clinical decisions following the latest CDC guidance, which continues to evolve as the medical community learns more about this new virus. COVID-19 RESPONSE COMMAND CENTER WEEKLY SITUATION REPORT • In addition to mandatory testing at state-operated 24/7 facilities, daily symptom checking and routine staff surveillance testing are important tools to protect staff, residents and visitors and will remain in place until such time there is a medical breakthrough or a safe and effective vaccine for COVID 19. Staff who are not feeling well are instructed not to come to work and to contact their health care provider. If staff show any signs of COVID-symptoms, they are required to self-quarantine at home, per CDC guidance for health care workers. • The Soldiers’ Home leadership is committed to ensuring the safety of the Veteran residents and restoring the Home to its rightful place that treats them with dignity, honor, and respect. The Soldiers’ Home leadership is moving into the Transition & Rebuilding Phase that is focused on rebuilding staff leadership and team and positioning the facility to move forward safely. • The Commonwealth has been making capital investments to address the short and long-term needs of the Home. This includes a short-term Refresh Project and a longer-term Rapid Planning Capital Project for a future Soldiers’ Home in Holyoke. While the expedited capital project will address long-term facility needs, the Executive Office of Health and Human Services, Department of Veterans’ Services, and Division of Capital Asset Management and Maintenance have been addressing immediate capital needs, including a $6 million refresh of units to significantly improve infection control for the residents and staff. o On Veterans Day, the Baker-Polito Administration announced the next steps for the expedited capital project for the Soldiers’ Home in Holyoke. Following the conclusion of the 12-week Rapid Planning Phase of the project, the Division of Capital Asset Management and Maintenance released the needs assessment report, and announced the selection of Payette Associates for the next phase as the design firm to lead the design and planning phase, the next step of the expedited capital project. Payette will build on the evaluation they previously completed, and will develop a full project scope, refine the plan, and confirm the budget, timelines, and ensure conformity with the regulatory process. One of the early deliverables is the preparation of the submission for the VA State Home Construction Grant by its April 15, 2021 deadline. The website for the project is www.mass.gov/HolyokeSHProject. • In June, the Baker-Polito Administration released the independent report ordered by Governor Baker to investigate the COVID-19 outbreak at Holyoke Soldiers’ Home, and announced a series of reforms to strengthen its governance and oversight of the Home, improving staffing processes, providing quality care for our Veterans, and planning for significant capital improvements. • The status of all residents as of February 2 is as follows: o Status:  0 veteran residents are positive and not clinically recovered  2 veteran residents are negative  44 veteran residents have a pending test. Please note that all veteran residents and staff are now being tested twice weekly, which will increase the number of pending tests.  76 veteran residents have been determined clinically recovered0 veteran residents have refused testing • Resident locations: o 118 veteran residents are onsite o 4 veteran residents are receiving acute care offsite • Since March 1, there have been 77 deaths of veteran residents who tested positive • Following the most recent staff surveillance testing o 4 tested positive COVID-19 RESPONSE COMMAND CENTER WEEKLY SITUATION REPORT o All others who previously tested positive are clinically recovered Chelsea Soldiers’ Home Weekly Update (current as of 2/2/21) • CVS Health returned to the Soldiers’ Home on January 19 and 20 to administer the second dose of the vaccine, while also providing vaccinations to those who were not vaccinated in the first round. On December 29 and 30, the first veteran residents and staff at the Soldiers’ Home in Chelsea received the COVID-19 vaccination. CVS Health will be back at the Soldiers’ Home on February 9 to administer the second dose of the vaccine and will also provide vaccinations to those who were not vaccinated in the first round. o 145 residents and 148 staff have received both doses. o 18 veteran residents and 97 staff received their first dose. • The Soldiers’ Home in Chelsea continues to prioritize virtual visitation, as visitation and movement throughout the facility remains suspended for all units until further notice per infection control protocol. The Home remains vigilant in its infection control, including enhanced precautions throughout the facility and strict infection control protocols to keep veteran residents and staff safe, including continuing staff education, screening, and testing. Visitation will resume after 14 consecutive days without a new positive test. • Families can request updates on their loved ones by contacting their assigned social worker, or emailing the Home at CSH@mass.gov. They can schedule virtual visits by video or phone call. Medical information can only be shared with an authorized health care proxy. • Clinical staff closely monitor any changes in residents, and the Soldiers’ Home’s medical team is making all clinical decisions following the latest CDC guidance, which continues to evolve as the medical community learns more about this new virus. The CDC recommends making medical decisions regarding when to end isolation and determine that the patient has recovered based on symptoms and time elapsed. • The Soldiers’ Home in Chelsea currently weekly staff surveillance testing. In accordance with CMS rules, the Soldiers’ Home is now conducting weekly testing until the facility is 14 days without positive test results. These tests are provided at no cost to employees. • The Soldiers’ Home in Chelsea monitors the PPE supply, and continues to receive shipments of PPE. The Incident Command team at the Chelsea Soldiers’ Home continues to enforce staff use of personal protective equipment (PPE), as well as source PPE to ensure that residents and staff have access to critical safety equipment. The team continues to coordinate closely with the VA Health Care System. • The status as of February 2 is as follows: o Residents  2 veteran residents are positive, all in independent living  129 veteran residents are negative  45 veteran residents have recovered, meaning they previously tested positive and are now clinically recovered  0 veteran residents have pending tests  Since March 1, there have been 31 deaths of veteran residents who tested positive o Following the most recent staff surveillance testing:  29 employees are positive  All other employees who previously tested positive have been determined clinically recovered COVID-19 RESPONSE COMMAND CENTER WEEKLY SITUATION REPORT Communications Resources Public Messaging Resources for Communities: The COVID-19 Command Center has produced many communication resources aimed at helping communities inform and educate residents on recent executive orders and guidance related to COVID-19. Visitors to the Stop COVID-19 Public Messaging webpage will find both printable flyers, posters, and digital resources in multiple languages on topics such as: • When can I get the COVID-19 vaccine? • Vaccine Graphics • Statewide guidelines, advisories, and orders • Staying safe in the community • Using local public alert systems for COVID-19 information • Materials for Business o Return to work guidance o Employee Screening Questionnaire o Business guidance – New, Temporary Capacity Limits o Updated safe store tips for retailers DPH Communication Materials in Multiple Languages • Facts Sheets • Videos Resources MassSupport MassSupport is the Massachusetts Crisis Counseling Program funded by the Federal Emergency Management Agency and managed in partnership between the Massachusetts Department of Mental Health and Riverside Trauma Center, a program of Riverside Community Care. Contact MassSupport by phone at 888-215-4920 or by email at MassSupport@riversidecc.org Red Cross Virtual Family Assistance Center In order to provide support to families and communities who have suffered loss as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, the American Red Cross has developed a Virtual Family Assistance Center (VFAC), staffed by a team of specially trained mental health, spiritual care, and health services volunteers who are: • Connecting with families over the phone to offer condolences, emotional and spiritual support, and access to available resources • Providing support for virtual memorial services for families, including connecting with local faith-based community partners • Hosting online classes to foster resilience and facilitate coping skills • Assisting families with access to national, state, or local resources such as grief counseling, legal resources, funeral information, financial information services, or veterans’ assistance • Additional state- and local-specific resources are available. People can visit: https://www.redcross.org/virtual-family-assistance-center/ma-family-assistance-center.html to access this resource with special virtual programs, information, referrals, and services to support families in need. People without internet access can call toll-free 833-492-0094 for help. All Family Assistance Center support will be provided virtually and is completely confidential and free. COVID-19 RESPONSE COMMAND CENTER WEEKLY SITUATION REPORT Department of Elementary and Secondary Education The Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) now reports on the number of positive COVID- 19 cases as reported to the DESE by school districts (including charter schools), collaboratives, and approved special education schools. The data only represents what has been reported to DESE. For more information and to view the report people can visit: http://www.doe.mass.edu/covid19/positive-cases/ COVID-19 Test Site Locator MEMA, in conjunction with the COVID-19 Command Center, has developed an interactive map that shows the locations of COVID-19 testing sites around the Commonwealth. Massachusetts COVID-19 Response Dashboard MEMA has developed and maintains a public-facing COVID-19 ArcGIS Online dashboard, available here. This dashboard is continuously updated and captures information about current COVID 19 case counts, cases by age, cases by county, hospital status, hospital bed status, death tolls, and deaths by age. Users should refresh the dashboard daily as enhancements are continuously being added. Health care facilities can learn more about requesting personal protective equipment here. Stay Informed • Get information from trusted sources. Get notified by text, email, or phone call in your preferred language. Visit https://member.everbridge.net/index/406686158291020/#/signup to sign-up for AlertsMA for the latest news on the Commonwealth’s response to COVID-19 • Take care of your emotional health: • Call 2-1-1 and choose the “CALL2TALK” option. • Samaritans is continuing operations 24/7, as always. During this unprecedented time, it can feel overwhelming to receive constant messages about COVID-19. Call or text their 24/7 helpline any time at 877-870-4673. • The Disaster Distress Helpline, 1-800-985-5990, is a 24/7, 365-day-a-year, national hotline dedicated to providing immediate crisis counseling for people who are experiencing emotional distress related to any natural or human-caused disaster, including disease outbreaks like COVID-19. This toll-free, multilingual, and confidential crisis support service is available to all residents in the United States and its territories. How to Help Out • Work at an Alternate Care Site in either Worcester or Lowell • Donate to the Massachusetts COVID-19 Relief Fund The Need for Blood Donations Continues, and Recovered COVID-19 Donors Can Help Save Lives In coordination with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Red Cross is seeking people who are fully recovered from the new coronavirus to sign up to donate plasma to help current COVID-19 patients. People who have fully recovered from COVID-19 have antibodies in their plasma that can attack the virus. This convalescent plasma is being evaluated as treatment for patients with serious or immediately life-threatening COVID-19 infections, or those judged by a healthcare provider to be at high risk of progression to severe or life-threatening condition. Interested individuals can visit RedCrossBlood.org/plasma4covid to learn more. The Red Cross follows the highest standards of safety and infection control, and volunteer donors are the only source of blood for those in need. To make an appointment to donate, please visit www.RedCrossBlood.org Archived: Friday, February 5, 2021 7:02:28 PM From: Vaira Harik Se nt: Fri, 5 Feb 2021 13:48:41 To: Sean O'Brien; Erika Woods; Phil Burt; Andrew Platt; Diana Gaumond; Deirdre Arvidson; Stephen Tebo; Beth Albert; Sonja Sheasley; Jack Yunits Jr.; Mike Maguire; Bill Traverse; Amy Alati; Lynn Mulkeen Cc: Cyr, Julian (SEN); Paula Schnepp; hnelson@duffyhealthcenter.org; Bethany Traverse; Patricia Cawley; Susan Mazzarella; jeffrey.soares@masenate.gov; pnadle@outercape.org; Karen Gardner; Nancy Bucken; Daniel Gray; Stephanie Prior; Sidhartha MD, Kumara; gjones@capecodhealth.org; wphinney@haconcapecod.org; Adam Burnett; Fleck, Rachel (CDA); Tom Cahir; Chris Kennedy; Chief Peter Burke; Kim Slade; Tracey Benson; drifmeyere@barnstablepolice.com; Suzie Hauptmann; mlauf@capecodhealth.org; Kevin Mulroy, DO; drodrigues@duffyhealthcenter.org; Elysse Magnotto-Cleary; Ryan Castle; timothy.whelan@mahouse.gov; Stephane Ruault; moliva@capecodcanalchamber.org; mkasparian@falmouthchamber.com; Barbara Cooper (CDC); Santibanez, Scott (CDC/DDID/NCEZID/DPEI); nelson.andrewsjr@mwtribe-nsn.gov; Phillips, Diana (EEC); cmenard@thefamilypantry.com; chrisf@capecodbuilders.org; Beth Waldman; Peake, Sarah - Rep. (HOU); sarah.ferrara@mahouse.gov; O'Brien, Nolan (Markey); Jessica Wong; michael.jackman@mail.house.gov; Dogan Temizir; paulhilton@capecodcollaborative.org; Gina Hurley; ciborowski_pam@mybps.us; Maria Coyne; Savannah Kelleher; slaye@mbl.edu; mtitas@gmail.com; karen.nolin@yahoo.com; Alicia Bryant; Group - Town Health Agents (7/24/20); Jocelyn Howard; lisa@wecancenter.org; Susan Moran; Maria Silva; Daniel Gray; Martha Taylor; Liz Kokernak; Betty Wong (CDC/DDPHSS/OS/OD); Elfriede Agyemang (CDC/DDPHSIS/CGH/DGHT); Allyssa Hathaway; Schulze, Frank (SEN); Johnson, Patrick (SEN); cjctodd@gmail.com; Dotty Caron; lpearson@sscac.org; Group - School Superintendents (@ 8/1/20); Group - COA Directors (7-1-20); Brooke Styche; Kenneth Cirillo; Donna Giberti; Group - Assembly of Delegates (08-17-20); Elizabeth Braccia; Sandy Faiman-Silva; brendan.dutch@masenate.gov; pauldart@pauseawhile.org; scott.mcgann@falmouthma.gov; Shaw, Christine; Gonsalves, Rita (IHS/NAS/MSH); sonnabendm@barnstablepolice.com; chrisf@capecodbuilders.org; cflanagan@town.dennis.ma.us; Nicole Taylor; Lawson, Christopher; Jim Golden; Joanne Geake; jgeake@sandwichmass.org; Meg Payne; Dan Gates; Rick Martin; Jill Brookshire; dhciavola@capecodhealth.org; Kristine Monteiro; Janet Schulte; melissa@nantucketchamber.org; Staniels, Jaime; kim.nahas@escci.org; Margaret Burke; Paul Speer; Liz Stapleton; Anna Marini; cdufault@monomoy.edu; htavano@monomoy.edu; asullivan@monomoy.edu; cfiocco@monomoy.edu; cmulhall@monomoy.edu; ssears@monomoy.edu; ascottputney@heritagemuseums.org; LAHesse@mycapecodbank.com; rccollins@mashpeema.gov; wtaylor@mashpeema.gov; tmcook@mashpeema.gov; Rep. Steve Xiarhos; Rita Mitchell (Public Health Nurse); barbaradominic612@gmail.com; Savanna Santarpio; Peckham, Ann-Marie; Endres, Sarah; Denise Galvin; denise.galvin@gmail.com; dgavron@outercape.org; Nicole Bartlett; Geoffrey Gorman; Lennon, Kevin; amulrow@heritagemuseums.org; Helen Grimm; Hope Hanscom; George Schmidt; Ashley Lopes; ecralston@chcofcapecod.org ; Matt Poole; healthagent@aquinnah-ma.gov; Marina Lent, Chilmark BOH; Meegan Lancaster; Maura Valley ; John Powers; rsantamaria@nantucket-ma.gov; beckie@wampanoagtribe.net; Caitlin Cantella; Michelle Aceto; Amy O'Leary; Edward Dunne (edward.dunne@falmouthpolicema.gov); preparednessgroup@capecodfive.com; Ronald Bergstrom; Sheila Lyons; Mark Forest; Janice O'Connell; Peter Lombardi; Patricia Palmer; Robyn Sweeting; Gina Torielli; Hillard Boskey; Group - CC Chamber of Commerce Board; kip.diggs@mahouse.gov; Kevin Howard; Foley, Brenda; bill@cataniahospitalitygroup.com; lisa@lisasellscapecod.com; elaineh@cssdioc.org; thomas.damario@mahouse.gov; Rep. Steve Xiarhos; Brad Schiff; Geoff Spillane; Beth Bullock-McGrail; Tapper, Abigail (DPH); amy@wellstrong.org; Jennifer Clarke; Danielle Alexandrov; gconran@conranpr.com; Poyant, Lynne; Noonan, Madeline; Hersey, Paula; Stephanie Costigan Subject: 2/5/21: Barnstable County and Regional COVID-19 Daily Update Se nsitivity: Normal Attachments: COVID Daily Update Chart Package, 2-5-21.docx; (Reminder: My charts show both new confirmed and new probable cases as reported by the DPH and as they appear in MAVEN. However, I have not been able to update the number of probable cases since December 6th due to lack of access to the data. Reporting on both confirmed and probable case numbers allows the best longitudinal comparison with past data and also most accurately reflects the incidence of new cases and thus the workloads of our town Public Health Nurses who carry out the contact tracing work.) Please see attached Chart Package for more detailed information Good Afternoon All. SUMMARY: 1. New Cases: DPH new cases reported yesterday: Barnstable County: 90 new cas es Martha's Vineyard: 3 new cas es . Nantucket: 26 new cases. 2. Hospitalizations and Fatalities: 3-day avg.hospitalizations have fallen significantly to the low-30s from the mid-60s three weeks ago; ICU patient numbers have fallen this week as well (10 patients) remain. COVID fatalities in Barnstable County have fallen as well, with 6 fatalities reported since Sunday. 3. Schools and Childcare Centers: Due to the mildness of the flu season the DPH has removed the requirement that all school children receive a flu vaccination on or before 2/28/21. Many school districts returned to a hybrid learning model last week. 4. Testing 5. Weekly Town Risk, and Statewide Cluster Analyses 6. Vaccination: \u8203 ? -Groups eligible for vaccination now are those in Phase 1, and Phase 2/Group 1 (persons aged 75+), depending upon availability of vaccine. -Planning for 4-5 sub-regional mass vaccination s ites on Cape Cod, to begin operation during Phase 2, is in place. The DPH is in discussions with the County Health Dept. to open is DPH-operated mass vaccination site on Cape Cod during Phase 2 of the vaccination plan. \u8203 ? \u8203 ?-Phase 2 of the State Vaccination Plan began on February 1. Vaccination at local clinics during Phase 2 will be by appointment only and appointments will be able to be scheduled once County and local health authorities can be sure of vaccine availability from the DPH. The public will be given notice of planned vaccination clinics for eligible persons in Phase 2. As noted, Phase 2 Group 1 only includes persons age 75+. 7. COVID Mutation and Changes in Transmissibility/Virulence/Other: There are three variants of concern: B117 (UK), B1351 (S. Africa), and P1 (Brazil). All three appear to be equally virulent but at least 50% more transmissible. Within two months of the B117 variant being identified in the UK (October) it became the dominant strain circulating there. The CDC is now posting surveillance information on the emergence of the B117 variant in the US: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/transmission/variant-cases.html.\u8203 ? Existing vaccines may be less effective against these new strains. The degree to which this may be so is being investigated. Moderna and Pfizer are working on a booster shot to counter these new strains. DETAIL: 1. New Cases Daily new case numbers in Barnstable County remain high but in a downward trend following the post-Christmas/New Year's surge. 90 cases were reported yesterday. Nantucket's 7-day average cas es per 100,000 population continues to trend lower. 6 cases were reported yesterday. Martha's Vineyard's 7-day average cases per 100,000 population is also trending lower. Three cases were reported yesterday. Trailing 14-Day Testing and Cases by County: See attached Chart Package 2. Hospitalizations and Fatalities Hospitalizations and acuity of illness have increased very significantly since the second week of November and remain elevated. Cape Cod Hospital and Falmouth Hospital have suspended visitation of inpatients except under very limited circumstances (end-of-life, etc.) and have stopped non-essential surgeries and other elective procedures. Since DPH reporting of hospitalizations has a 2-day lag Tina Shaw of CCHC is providing me with more recent information (thank you Tina). Yesterday evening CCHC reported that there were 32 COVID patients in hospital, 10 of which were in the ICU. Fatalities: 1 additional fatality was reported yesterday. The total is now 346. Recent data on COVID fatalities in Barns table County sugges t that residents of Long Term Care/Skilled Nursing Facilities/Rest Homes represent over 50% of all fatalities (139 of 256 fatalities, as of 1/5/21). This is a lower percentage than that seen during phase 1 of the pandemic last s pring (over 65%). 3. Schools and Childcare Centers School districts are staying vigilant and reacting well to new cases. Most school districts on the Cape and Is lands are in a hybrid learning status now. DESE and the DPH (memo of 1/8/21) announced that they are seeking to introduce COVID-19 screening testing using a pooled strategy in the school setting. Schools may elect to participate by responding to a survey that DESE/DPH have pos ted. Further information will be forthcoming. For the 2020-2021 s chool year the DPH has mandated that all school children be vaccinated for seasonal influenza. This week the DPH extended the deadline for doing so from 12/31/20 to 2/28/21. This mandate has been canceled by the DPH. During Phas e 2 of the state vaccination rollout childcare center s taff are to be vaccinated alongside school staff. 4. Testing Additional testing locations in Barnstable County for both symptomatic and asymptomatic persons remain open in Falmouth at the Fairgrounds and in Hyannis at Cape Cod HealthCare (the Melody Tent site has been given over to vaccination clinics). Daily testing capacity is 50 at the Falmouth site and 350 at the Hyannis site. Neither site is open daily and persons must call ahead for an appointment. Details: https://www.capecodhealth.org/medical-services/infectious-disease/coronavirus/covid-19-testing-process/. In late December additional tes ting by Outer Cape Community Health Services began and continues at its 3 locations in Wellfleet, Harwich Port, and Provincetown (https://outercape.org/2020/12/23/outer-cape-health- services-to-offer-covid-19-asymptomatic-testing-beginning-december-23/). These sites may not open be daily and persons must call ahead for an appointment. Eligibility criteria for the testing include residency in Barnstable County. Testing is done by appointment only. Tests cost $75, $110 for travel-related tests , and no one will be turned away if unable to pay for a test. DPH-mandated routine testing in skilled nursing facilities/long term care settings (SNF/LTC) continues. This provides critical surveillance and allows these facilities to stay ahead of asymptomatic spread amongst staff and residents. Routine testing in SNF/LTC settings is conducted weekly for staff. In addition, the State's BinaxNOW rapid testing program (available to schools) has been extended to visitors of nursing homes and rest home residents (LTC settings) to allow visitation of residents while limiting the risk of infection from visitors. DPH has published guidance on this. The program has als o been extended to childcare centers and homeless shelters and management of these facilities may apply to the EEC and DPH for testing kits. 5. Weekly Town Risk and Statewide Cluster Analyses 6. Vaccination Groups eligible for vaccination now are those in Phase 1, and Phase 2/Group 1 (persons aged 75+), depending upon availability of vaccine. On February 1 persons in Phase 2/Group 1 (age 75+) became eligible to be vaccinated at locations which have the vaccine available. However appointments may not be immediately available due to overwhelming demand and still-limited supply of vaccine from the manufacturers. Childcare staff will be eligible for vaccination alongside school staff in Phase 2. The State has contracted with CVS and Walgreens to arrange vaccination of older adults in SNFs/congregate care. CVS, Walgreens, and Stop & Shop pharmacies will also schedule vaccinations for the groups in Phase 2, again depending upon vaccine supply. Planning for 4-5 sub-regional mass vaccination sites on Cape Cod, to begin operation during Phase 2, is in place. The DPH is in discussions with the County Health Dept. to open is DPH-operated mass vaccination site on Cape Cod during Phase 2 of the vaccination plan. Phase 2 of the State Vaccination Plan began on February 1. Vaccination at local clinics during Phase 2 will be by appointment only and appointments for local vaccination clinics will be able to be scheduled once County and local health authorities can be sure of vaccine availability from the DPH. The public will be given notice of planned vaccination clinics for eligible persons in Phase 2. As noted, Phase 2 Group 1 only includes persons age 75+. Plans for regional mass vaccination sites, to begin operation during Phase 2, are in place. Vaccination is available at several State-run mass vaccination sites around Massachusetts. The closest one to Cape Cod is at Gillette Stadium in Foxboro. Appointments can be scheduled by visiting https://www.cic- health.com/vaccines-location, or calling 2-1-1 and following the prompts . 7. COVID Mutation and Changes in Transmissibility/Virulence/Other The emergence of a variant of the COVID-19 virus in the UK, classified as B.1.1.7, was identified in October and publicized in early December. Reports hold that B117 is 50% - 70% more contagious than our predominant variant now circulating (D614G). Within two months of the variant being identified in the UK (October) it became dominant strain circulating there. B117 is spreading globally and has been detected in the US. Additional variants of concern have emerged internationally: B1351 (South Africa) and Brazil (P1) which are also highly transmissible. Existing vaccine recipes may be less effective against these three new strains. Researchers are working to determine if B117 differs from D614G in terms of: 1. How sick people become, 2. If natural immunity is different following infection with D614G, and 3. If immunity from vaccination differs since the vaccine was developed during the period that D614G has been predominant. The existing vaccines may be less effective against the new strains. Moderna and Pfizer are working on a booster shot to counter these new strains. The CDC is now pos ting surveillance information on the emergence of the B117 variant in the US: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/transmission/variant-cases.html. According to an article by Andrew Joseph from StatNews, "Coronavirus es evolve more slowly than viruses like flu, but they do pick up mutations as they spread. SARS-CoV-2 has been adding one or two changes a month to its RNA genome since it emerged late last year in China, and different versions of the virus have been continuously circulating throughout the course of the pandemic. But this variant (B.1.1.7 or VUI-202012/01) showed up with at least 17 mutations, according to one genetic analysis." (Source: https://www.s tatnews.com/2020/12/21/l oomi ng-questi ons-new-vari ant-coronavi rus/?utm_source=STAT+Newsl etters&utm_campai gn=1a74bda2ca- MR_COPY_01&utm_medi um=email &utm_term=0_8cab1d7961-1a74bda2ca-150158417 ). ______________________ Vaira Harik, M.S. Deputy Director Barnstable County Dept. of Human Services Cell: 520-271-6314 Email: vharik@barnstablecounty.org Vaira Harik, Barnstable County Dept of Human Services COVID Daily Update Chart Package, 2/5/21 1 Vaira Harik, Barnstable County Dept of Human Services COVID Daily Update Chart Package, 2/5/21 2 Vaira Harik, Barnstable County Dept of Human Services COVID Daily Update Chart Package, 2/5/21 3 Vaira Harik, Barnstable County Dept of Human Services COVID Daily Update Chart Package, 2/5/21 4 Source: NYTimes.com: BARNSTABLE 2/5/21 DUKES, 2/5/21 NANTUCKET, 2/5/21 Vaira Harik, Barnstable County Dept of Human Services COVID Daily Update Chart Package, 2/5/21 5 LAST WEEK: BARNSTABLE 1/27/21 DUKES, 1/27/21 NANTUCKET, 1/27/21 Vaira Harik, Barnstable County Dept of Human Services COVID Daily Update Chart Package, 2/5/21 6 Source: V. Harik, Barn. County Dept of Human Services; Tabulation of MA DPH Data WEEKLY: (On Tuesdays) Date Reported by DPH Hospital Hospital Beds Occupied ICU Beds Occupied Barnstable County Cases Barnstable County Deaths 3-Day Avg. of Persons in Hosp. (Med/Surg + ICU) ICU Percent of Beds Occupied 4/22/2020 Cape Cod Hospital 11 5 Falmouth Hospital 13 7 (Wave 1 Peak)24 12 678 27 41.0 33% 4/28/2020 Cape Cod Hospital 18 5 Falmouth Hospital 11 14 29 19 820 39 27.7 40% 12/22/2020 Cape Cod Hospital 22 2 Falmouth Hospital 8 1 30 3 4,644 221 36.0 9% 12/29/2020 Cape Cod Hospital 41 5 Falmouth Hospital 11 2 52 7 5,181 229 58.3 12% 1/5/2021 Cape Cod Hospital 23 7 Falmouth Hospital 19 3 42 10 5,818 256 51.0 19% 1/12/2021 Cape Cod Hospital 26 14 Falmouth Hospital 9 4 35 18 6,685 277 49.0 34% 1/19/2021 Cape Cod Hospital 28 13 Falmouth Hospital 10 5 38 18 7,499 303 61.0 32% 1/26/2021 Cape Cod Hospital 22 13 Falmouth Hospital 10 5 32 18 8,303 323 46.7 36% 2/2/2021 Cape Cod Hospital 10 13 Falmouth Hospital 5 6 15 19 8,770 342 36.3 56% Hospitalizations, Last Report: Hospital Beds Occupied (Last Report) ICU Beds Occupied (Last Report) Barnstable County Cases (Confirmed) Barnstable County Deaths 3-Day Avg. of Persons in Hosp. (Med/Surg + ICU) ICU Percent of Beds Occupied 2/4/2021 Cape Cod Hospital 13 5 Falmouth Hospital 9 5 22 10 8,920 345 32.7 31% CumulativeNot Cumulative Barnstable County COVID-Related Hospital & ICU Beds Occupied, with Cases & Deaths Not Cumulative Cumulative (Wave 1 Peak) Vaira Harik, Barnstable County Dept of Human Services COVID Daily Update Chart Package, 2/5/21 7 Barnstable County COVID Cases and Facility-Reported Deaths in Long Term Care Facilities (thru 1/5/21) #Facility County Total Licensed Beds Cases* (Staff & Residents) Deaths** (Residents Only) 1 ADVINIA CARE AT PROVINCETOWN Barnstable 41 1-10 0 2 BOURNE MANOR EXTENDED CARE FACILITY Barnstable 142 11-30 1-4 3 CAPE HERITAGE REHABILITATION & HEALTH CARE CENTER Barnstable 123 1-10 0 4 CAPE REGENCY REHABILITATION & HEALTH CARE CENTER Barnstable 120 >30 17 5 CAPE WINDS REST HOME OF HYANNIS Barnstable 37 11-30 0 6 CAPE WINDS REST HOME OF SANDWICH Barnstable 20 0 0 7 JML CARE CENTER INC Barnstable 132 11-30 5 8 LIBERTY COMMONS Barnstable 132 11-30 1-4 9 MAYFLOWER PLACE NURSING & REHABILITATION CENTER Barnstable 72 11-30 1-4 10 PAVILION THE Barnstable 82 >30 1-4 11 PLEASANT BAY OF BREWSTER REHAB CENTER Barnstable 135 >30 19 12 ROSEWOOD MANOR REST HOME Barnstable 33 1-10 0 13 ROYAL CAPE COD NURSING & REHABILITATION CENTER Barnstable 99 >30 20 14 ROYAL MEGANSETT NURSING & REHABILITATION Barnstable 90 11-30 0 15 ROYAL NURSING CENTER LLC Barnstable 121 >30 22 16 ROYAL OF COTUIT Barnstable 120 11-30 1-4 17 SOUTH DENNIS HEALTHCARE Barnstable 128 >30 11 18 TERRACES ORLEANS (THE)Barnstable 50 1-10 0 19 WINDSOR NURSING & RETIREMENT HOME Barnstable 120 >30 1-4 20 WINGATE AT HARWICH Barnstable 135 >30 21 Totals, Barnstable County 1,932 139 (Estimated) LTC Facility Percentage of Total COVID Fatalities in Barnstable County, 3/1/20 to 1/5/21 54% Source: MA DPH COVID Weekly Report, 1/7/21. *Staff and residents; **Cumulative COVID-19 deaths –includes residents only. ***Facility is closed. Data will continue to be included for completeness but will not change except for the result of data cleaning. PLEASE NOTE: This list includes nursing homes, rest homes, and skilled nursing facilities; reported COVID-19 cases to date represent both staff and residents. The number of cases for a facility relies on the amount of testing conducted; facilities not included on this list may have COVID-19 cases that have not yet been identified. As of May 25th 344 nursing homes reported that at least 90% of staff and 90% of residents had been tested. ALSO: Data on deaths is self-reported by each facility. In accordance with long-term care regulations, nursing homes and rest homes must report deaths due to any cause in any resident, either confirmed COVID-19 positive, or suspected to have COVID-19, even if the individual was never tested. When the number of deaths is between 1-4 residents, the number is suppressed and reported as 1- 4, to protect possible resident identification. The Department of Public Health performs routine data quality reviews of the data it receives. This includes removing duplicate results and updating counts if needed. Also, occasional negative tests from nursing home residents result after being reported first as presumptive and are removed. As a result of this, the total of self-reported deaths may decrease to ensure accuracy. Data Sources: MAVEN for confirmed cases; Individual facilities reported resident deaths to DPH Bureau of Health Care Safety and Quality’s Health Care Facility Reporting System. Vaira Harik, Barnstable County Dept of Human Services COVID Daily Update Chart Package, 2/5/21 8 Vaira Harik, Barnstable County Dept of Human Services COVID Daily Update Chart Package, 2/5/21 9 MA DPH Data Dashboard, WEEKLY REPORT of 2/4/21 (for the Period 1/17/20 to 1/30/21) City/Town Population (March 2020 to Present) Total Case Count Case Count Last 14 Days Average Daily Incidence Rate per 100K Relative Change in Case Count Total Tests Total Tests Last 14 Days Positive Tests Last 14 Days Percent Positivity Last 14 Days Change in Percent Positivity Barnstable 44,773 2,647 283 45.1 Lower 52,146 4,866 316 6.49%Lower Bourne 21,026 884 102 34.7 Lower 28,561 2,919 119 4.08%Lower Brewster 9,926 337 77 55.4 Higher 13,154 1,730 84 4.86%Higher Chatham 5,830 221 46 56.4 Lower 6,675 548 51 9.31%Lower Dennis 13,088 504 73 39.8 Lower 13,657 1,413 82 5.80%No Change Eastham 4,603 89 20 31.0 No Change 3,630 334 22 6.59%Lower Falmouth 31,190 1,081 133 30.5 Lower 44,559 3,682 150 4.07%Lower Harwich 12,589 512 60 34.0 Lower 13,795 1,266 69 5.45%Lower Mashpee 15,535 527 68 31.3 Lower 17,960 1,614 74 4.58%Lower Orleans 5,620 190 76 96.6 Higher 5,087 625 76 12.16%Higher Provincetown 2,583 59 <5 11.1 Lower 3,738 259 4 1.54%Lower Sandwich 21,078 783 115 39.0 Lower 21,284 1,868 133 7.12%Lower Truro 1,968 32 11 39.9 Higher 1,641 120 11 9.17%Higher Wellfleet 2,760 48 9 23.3 Higher 2,326 214 10 4.67%Lower Yarmouth 24,062 1,006 127 37.7 Lower 28,362 3,036 138 4.55%Lower Barnstable County 216,629 8,920 1,200 39.7 Lower 256,575 24,494 1,339 5.47%Lower Aquinnah 261 0 0 0 No Change 466 18 0 0%No Change Chilmark 759 12 0 0 No Change 3,074 161 0 0%No Change Edgartown 4,086 240 29 50.7 Lower 9,606 659 30 4.55%Lower Gosnold 45 5 0 0 No Change 120 3 0 0%No Change Oak Bluffs 5,209 208 38 52.1 Lower 6,518 476 43 9.03%No Change Tisbury 4,174 240 25 42.8 Lower 12,099 868 25 2.88%Lower West Tisbury 2,871 83 8 19.9 Lower 4,293 295 9 3.05%Lower Dukes County 17,404 793 101 41.0 Lower 36,176 2,480 107 4.31%Lower Nantucket 11,416 1,089 95 59.4 Lower 19,786 1,637 98 5.99%Lower Dukes and Nantucket Counties 28,820 1,881 195 56.3 Lower 55,962 4,117 205 4.98%Lower State 6,964,383 504,564 47,659 48.9 Lower 13,874,158 1,299,378 56,149 4.32%Lower Data Source: MA DPH, 2/4/21 Weekly COVID Report (https://www.mass.gov/info-details/covid-19-response-reporting); Analysis: V. Harik BCDHS. Massachusetts COVID Testing Rates, As Applied to Barnstable County (Thru 1/30/21) Sources: Census.gov; MA DPH Weekly COVID Report, 1/21/21. Analysis: V. Harik, BCDHS MA Barnstable County Population Estimate (via DPH)216,629 Barnstable County % of MA Pop.3.11% Barn. County % of Total MA Tests 1.85% Barn. County % of MA Tests, Past Two Weeks 1.89% Barn. County % of MA Total Confirmed Cases 1.77% Barn. County % of MA Confirmed Cases, Past Two Weeks 2.52% MA % Positive Tests Last 14 Days 4.32% Barnstable County % Positive Tests Last 14 Days 5.47% 6,964,383 Vaira Harik, Barnstable County Dept of Human Services COVID Daily Update Chart Package, 2/5/21 10 Vaira Harik, Barnstable County Dept of Human Services COVID Daily Update Chart Package, 2/5/21 11 Updated 1/25/21 Weekly Count of New COVID-19 Infections: March 8, 2020 – January 30, 2021 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 3/8-3/143/15-3/213/22-3/283/29-4/44/5-4/114/12-4/184/19-4/254/26-5/25/3-5/95/10-5/165/17-5/235/24-5/305/31-6/66/7-6/136/14-6/206/21-6/276/28-7/47/5-7/117/12-7/187/19-7/257/26-8/18/2-8/88/9-8/158/16-8/228/23-8/298/30-9/59/6-9/129/13-9/199/20-9/269/27-10/310/4-10/1010/11-10/1710/18-10/2410/25-10/3111/1-11/711/8-11/1411/15-11/2111/22-11/2811/29-12/512/6-12/1212/13-12/1912/20-12/2612/27-1/21/3-1/91/10-1/161/17-1/231/24-1/301 5 3 1 2 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 2 5 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 1 2 3 0 1 4 1 3 6 6 13 22 11 7 20 24 25 53 13 0 0 3 3 7 53 14 2 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 3 0 0 1 5 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 2 1 New Brewster COVID-19 Cases Resident (247 Total)Long Term Care (105 Total staff & patients) Ages of Brewster Residents with Active COVID-19 Infections January 17 – January 23 0-9 years (7) 13% 10-19 years (7) 13% 20-29 years (6) 11% 30-39 years (3) 5% 40-49 years (9) 16% 50-59 years (7) 13% 60-69 years (8) 15% 70-79 years (5) 9% 80+ years (3) 5% 0-9 years (7) 10-19 years (7) 20-29 years (6) 30-39 years (3) 40-49 years (9) 50-59 years (7) 60-69 years (8) 70-79 years (5) 80+ years (3) 0-9 years (2) 15%10-19 years (1) 7% 20-29 years (2) 14% 30-39 years (2) 14% 40-49 years (1) 7% 50-59 years (3) 22% 60-69 years (2) 14% 70-79 years (1) 7% 80+ years (0) 0% 0-9 years (2) 10-19 years (1) 20-29 years (2) 30-39 years (2) 40-49 years (1) 50-59 years (3) 60-69 years (2) 70-79 years (1) 80+ years (0) January 24 – January 30 % COVID Infections in Age Groups % COVID Infections in Age Groups Brewster Select Board Meeting of February 8, 2021 Consent Calendar Items 1 8. Consent Agenda Select Board Letter to Governor Baker Regarding COVID Vaccine Supply Chair Chaffee has drafted a letter to Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker to urge a large scale vaccination site to be established on Cape Cod, as Barnstable County has the third oldest county population in the nation. ADMINISTRATIVE RECOMMENDATION We recommend the Board approve the Chair to sign and send the letter to Governor Charlie Baker Vote and Sign to Set Seasonal Population The ABCC requires towns to provide an estimate of the temporary increase in population by March 1st every year. This seasonal population estimate is used to establish a quota for seasonal package stores. Currently Brewster does not have any such licenses, but by keeping ABCC informed, it allows the Board the right to issue such licenses. We recommend the Board set the seasonal population at 30,000. The Police Chief has reviewed and approved this number. ADMINISTRATIVE RECOMMENDATION We recommend the Board approve this request Vote on Public Beach Access Request – Coastal Carriers Coastal Carries is requesting access to Mant’s Landing for a beach nourishment project at 322 Robbins Hill Road. Work is anticipated to be completed in one day during mid-February. ADMINISTRATIVE RECOMMENDATION We recommend the Board to approve this beach assess request with support of the Conservation Agent. Approve February 1, 2021 Meeting Minutes ADMINISTRATIVE RECOMMENDATION We recommend the Board to approve these minutes. Town of Brewster 2198 Main Street Brewster, MA 02631-1898 Phone: (508) 896-3701 brewster-ma.gov Office of the: Select Board and the Town Administrator The Honorable Governor Charles Baker Office of the Governor, Room 280 Massachusetts State House 24 Beacon St. Boston, MA 02133 Dear Governor Baker, The Brewster Select Board implores you to establish a large-scale COVID-19 vaccine distribution operation on Cape Cod and ensure that Barnstable County receives its “fair share” of vaccine. Cape Cod received 975 COVID vaccine doses this week intended for our 215,000 year- round residents. We understand the supply is dependent on the what the State receives but we are compelled to point out how inadequate the supply is that’s being provided. Barnstable County has the third oldest county population in the nation, and our vulnerable elders are desperate to receive protective vaccine. They are not alone, we are hearing from residents of all ages who want to be vaccinated to protect themselves and their loved ones, and to be part of the solution to the pandemic. Cape Cod residents are hungry for information. On February 3, 2021, Senator Julian Cyr hosted a COVID-19 vaccine briefing by telephone – over 13,000 residents joined in to learn how they can get vaccinated. They were instructed to be patient. Our highly prepared and innovative County government is ready to vaccinate but we need your leadership – and we need vaccine. Respectfully, Mary Chaffee, PhD, JD, RN, FAAN Chair, Select Board Town of Brewster 2198 Main Street Brewster, MA 02631-1898 Phone: (508) 896-3701 Fax: (508) 896-8089 Office of: Select Board Town Administrator Memo To: Select Board From: Robin Young; Executive Assistant to the Town Administrator Date: February 8, 2021 RE: Seasonal Population The ABCC requires each town to set their seasonal population annually. At the recommendation of the Police Chief, the temporary increased resident population of Brewster is estimated to be 30,000. To Whom It May Concern: Acting under authority contained in M.G.L. Ch. 138, s17, as amended, our Board at a meeting held on , estimated that the temporary increased resident population of , as of July 10, 2021 will be . This estimate was made and voted upon by us at a meeting called for the purpose, after due notice to each of the members of the time, place and purpose of said meeting, and after investigation and ascertainment by us of all the facts and after cooperative discussion and deliberation. The estimate is true to the best of our knowledge and belief. The above statements are made under the pains and penalties of perjury. City / Town: 2021 Seasonal Population Increase Estimation Form Date: Alcoholic Beverages Control Commission c/o Licensing Department 95 Fourth Street, Suite 3 Chelsea, MA 02150 Date of Meeting City / Town Name Estimated Population Very truly yours, Local Licensing Authorities This certificate must be signed by a majority of the members of the local licensing authority. COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES CONTROL COMMISSION 95 Fourth Street, Suite 3, Chelsea, MA 02150 Town of Brewster 2198 Main Street Brewster, MA 02631-1898 Phone: (508) 896-3701 Fax: (508) 896-8089 www.brewster-ma.gov BoS 02-01-21 Page 1 of 5 Office of: Select Board Town Administrator MINUTES OF THE SELECT BOARD REGULAR SESSION MINUTES DATE: TIME: PLACE: ALL PARTICIPANTS ARE PARTICIPATING REMOTELY: Chair Chaffee, Selectperson deRuyter, Selectperson Whitney, Selectperson Chatelain, Selectperson Bingham, Town Administrator Peter Lombardi, Assistant Town Administrator Susan Broderick, Assistant Town Administrator Donna Kalinick, Frank Bridges, Bob Young, Pete Dahl, Executive Assistant to the Town Administrator Robin Young Call to Order & Declaration of a Quorum, Meeting Participation Statement and Recording Statement Chair Chaffee called the meeting to order at 6:00pm, conducted a roll call vote of attendance, declared a quorum present, and read the meeting participation and recording statements. Public Announcements and Comment: Members of the public may address the Select Board on matters not on the meeting’s agenda for a February 1, 2021 6:00 PM Remote Teleconference maximum 3-5 minutes at the Chair’s discretion. Under the Open Meeting Law, the Select Board is unable to reply but may add items presented to a future agenda. None. Select Board Announcements and Liaison Reports Chair Chaffee announced the passing of long time Brewster resident Bill Porter. Town Administrator’s Report Mr. Lombardi announced a Charter Committee public forum, which will be held on Tuesday February 2, 2021 at 6pm. Patrick Ellis, DPW Director, has announced his retirement. The process to hire a new DPW Director will begin in March. Mr. Lombardi reviewed the State Executive Order 62, which extended occupancy restrictions on businesses until further notice. The Town offices could potentially re-open to the public the week of February 16, 2021. Time restrictions on local business have been rescinded. The focus at the State level is now on the vaccine and distribution to residents 75 years and older. Efforts have been hampered, mainly due to a supply shortage. The Barnstable County has launched a Covid hotline, which had received over 7500 calls in the first week. Brewster has had over 350 Covid positive cases since the beginning of the pandemic, with 105 in long term care facilities. In the past 5 weeks 141 new positive cases occurred. Last week the case count declined. Both elementary schools, the Laurel School and the Family School are using remote learning until at least the end of February vacation. All testing site locations are posted on the Town Town of Brewster 2198 Main Street Brewster, MA 02631-1898 Phone: (508) 896-3701 Fax: (508) 896-8089 www.brewster-ma.gov BoS 02-01-21 Page 2 of 5 Office of: Select Board Town Administrator webpage. Chair Chaffee added that the Barnstable County has launched a feature on their Covid page, which will offer an email sign up for those interested in vaccination clinics. Consent Agenda Meeting Minutes: December 21 and 23, 2020 January 19 and 25, 2021 Fee Waiver: Brewster Historical Society Farmers Market Appointment: Renee Dee – Historical Commission Acceptance of 2020 Donations Site Owner Estoppel Certificate: DSD Renewables for Captain’s Golf Course Driving Range Solar Carport Mr. Lombardi asked for the Board to give him authorization to approve discretional wording changes on the estoppel certificate in the event minor changes needed to be made. Mr. Lombardi acknowledged the generous donations made to the Town and thanked the donors. Selectperson Whitney moved to approve the February 1, 2021 consent agenda, Selectperson Bingham second. Selectperson Whitney moved to amend his original motion, adding to allow Mr. Lombardi authorization to amend the language on the estoppel certificate, Selectperson Bingham second. A roll call vote was taken. Selectperson Whitney-yes, Selectperson Chatelain-yes, Selectperson deRuyter-yes, Selectperson Bingham-yes, Chair Chaffee-yes. The Board vote was 5-yes, 0-No. Present and Discuss Finance Committee Report on Nauset Regional High School Project – Pete Dahl, Finance Committee Chair Finance Committee Chair Pete Dahl updated to the Select Board that on Jan 27, 2021 the Brewster Finance Committee voted 3 in favor and 5 against a motion to support the Nauset Regional High School (NRHS) project. He then read a prepared statement that gave an overview comments made by Finance Committee members who both supported and opposed the project. Robert Young presented the report of the FinCom Subcommittee on Nauset Regional High School Project. This covered the history of the project, the current state of the high school building, project size and scope, student utilization of the high school, financial considerations, and the potential debt and repayment. As the largest Capital project the Town has taken, there was a great deal of effort put in to reviewing the financial impact of the project. Mr. Young reviewed a financial analysis on the FY18 Nauset Regional School operational costs, including the financial impact on School Choice students. Chris Easley noted that there are internet issues in Brewster during the meeting, preventing some residents from logging on to the meeting. The School Committee requested to be able to respond to this report at the next Select Board meeting. The cost to educate students is reported annually, and approved by voters. Greg Levasseur noted they are disappointed that the Finance Committee did not support the project. The Department of Education had to sign off on the project before the MSBA issued the grant, and that the $95 million dollar cost is not fixed. Lower bids could come in and there is a $5 million dollar contingency fund. A $36 million dollar grant was Town of Brewster 2198 Main Street Brewster, MA 02631-1898 Phone: (508) 896-3701 Fax: (508) 896-8089 www.brewster-ma.gov BoS 02-01-21 Page 3 of 5 Office of: Select Board Town Administrator issued by MSBA for this project, which would equal a $17.5 million dollar share to Brewster’s anticipated costs. He urged residents to vote on the project. Selectperson deRuyter and Mr. Young discussed the cost analysis presented and the impact of fixed and variable costs on the proposed savings of reducing the school choice student population. Selectperson deRuyter also mentioned an op-ed piece in the Cape Codder that noted the data of annual inflation rates on Massachusetts school building costs from 2009-2017, being 6.33%. If the project is rejected as is by voters now, it will be another several years before a project will be recognized by MSBA, and the inflations costs on the project will be considerable. Selectperson deRuyter does not want to build a school that would house the current number of students, and feels that they should be anticipating that the student population will grow as housing needs are addressed locally. Selectperson Bingham is concerned with percentage of School Choice students, and would like to see the number allowed reduced. Selectperson Chatelain would like to see a school that attracts families to the district. Selectperson Whitney is concerned that the inflation costs to build a school years down the road will be much higher, and feels that it is too late to start over with a new proposed project. He supports the project as is. Frank Bridges noted the Building Committee was tasked to site a school for 905 students, which is what they did. No one wants to see the education levels decline, and if the choice was made back in 2017 to site a school for 700 students they would be having a completely different conversation that would have saved the residents a significant amount of money. The student populations across the Cape has had an annual declining trend, and he feels that a larger scale regionalization could be possible. Selectperson Chatelain asked if the School Committee is having a discussion on School Choice student population. Mr. Lombardi noted that the School Committee has the full authority to vote to determine the policy direction. There were preliminary discussions, early in the project, regarding the School Choice program. Mr. Levasseur noted that the prior Building Committee built the current school for 700 students in 1975. As is, the building has too small of spaces to meet building codes. If the project is voted down, they will need to fund a new Architect and Project Manager. Chris Easley commented that when the project began, the problem being addressed was a 50 year old building, not the amount of School Choice students. Frank Bridges recalled meetings back in 2017, where the Superintendent of Schools has spoken to each of the 4 towns, and at no time declining enrollment or the amount of School Choice students were mentioned. The School Committee originally recommended a 1000 student school to the MSBA, who reduced the number to 900. Chair Chaffee opened the meeting to public comment. Helga Dyer feels it is unfair to residents to have to subsidize the student choice students, and take students away from their residential school district. Mary Loftus Levine noted the movement of families to the Cape due to the Covid pandemic, the need for diversity on Cape Cod, and the financial impacts of voting against the project. Casey Mecca moved to Brewster specifically so her children would be in the Nauset District, and noted the 28 new students enrolled in a Brewster Elementary school this year. She would like to see the project pass, as the building is in critical need of repair. Michael Grugran noted serious material flaws in the analysis by the FinCom subcommittee and asked for them to retract the report. He feels that the report contains an accounting premise flaw, is inaccurate as it does not account for a increase in per pupil costs if the school population was reduced by 300 students. He has concern for the spread of disinformation by the community members, the press, and on social media. Adam Lange is against Town of Brewster 2198 Main Street Brewster, MA 02631-1898 Phone: (508) 896-3701 Fax: (508) 896-8089 www.brewster-ma.gov BoS 02-01-21 Page 4 of 5 Office of: Select Board Town Administrator the project, and does not feel that school enrollment will increase. He feels that the affordable housing in Town is not being created for families, and the reimbursement cost of educating school choice students will not increase. John Lipman is supportive of the Building Project. Finance Committee Chair Mr. Dahl feels that families are both moving to and away from the school district for various reasons, and that the cost per pupil at NRHS is high for the region. He thanked the Select Board for hosting this discussion. Review Select Board’s June 2020 Statement on Local Issues of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion and Vote on Update to Pledge Last summer the Brewster Select Board pledged to address the local issues of equity, diversity and inclusion. This was identified as a FY21-22 Fiscal Year goal. An update was given by Mr. Lombardi on the steps taken through the summer of 2020. Chair Chaffee read the proposed updated pledge. Mr. Lombardi thanked the Board for raising the issue. Training on Cultural Awareness and Diversity has provided to Town staff. The Massachusetts Housing Partnership is holding an educational forum on March 25th which will be re- broadcast. Mr. Lombardi had a discussion with the Martin Luther King action team and looks forward to having additional discussions with similar organizations, including the Massachusetts Municipal Management Association. He wishes to offer this as a joint statement from both the Select Board and Town Administration. Selectperson deRuyter is supportive of the efforts and looks forward to future updates. Selectperson Bingham feels that the pledge reflects the community. The Board members all support issuing this as a joint statement. Selectperson deRuyter moved to adopt the amended statement and include the Town Administrator, Selectperson Bingham second. A roll call vote was taken. Selectperson Whitney-yes, Selectperson Chatelain-yes, Selectperson deRuyter-yes, Selectperson Bingham-yes, Chair Chaffee-yes. The Board vote was 5-yes, 0-No. Initial Discussion on Spring 2021 Town Meeting Logistics Due to the continued Covid-19 pandemic, the logistics of the Town Meeting will need to be held similar to the events of last year. Saturday May 15th or May 22nd are potential dates. The Annual Town Election is scheduled for May 18th, but can be pushed back if the Town Meeting is held on May 22nd. Due to upgrades at the Whitecaps field, the location of the meeting might need to be changed to another site. Mr. Lombardi would like the Select Board to vote on a date at their next meeting once further logistics have been defined. Federal legislations has extended access to CARES funding to ensure additional costs of holding the meeting to meet Covid-19 precautions and guidelines are covered. For Your Information No discussion. Matters Not Reasonably Anticipated by the Chair None. Town of Brewster 2198 Main Street Brewster, MA 02631-1898 Phone: (508) 896-3701 Fax: (508) 896-8089 www.brewster-ma.gov BoS 02-01-21 Page 5 of 5 Office of: Select Board Town Administrator Questions from the Media None. Next Meetings: February 2, 8, 10, 16, 22, and 24 Adjournment Selectperson deRuyter moved to adjourn at 8:03pm, Selectperson Chatelain second. A roll call vote was taken. Selectperson Whitney-yes, Selectperson Chatelain-yes, Selectperson deRuyter-yes, Selectperson Bingham-yes, Chair Chaffee-yes. The Board vote was 5-yes, 0-No. Respectfully submitted, Robin Young Approved: _______________ Signed: _______________________________________ Date Selectperson Bingham, Clerk of the Board of Selectman Accompanying Documents in Packet: Agenda, TA Report documents, Consent Items, FinCom Subcommittee Analysis and Comments, DEI Statement, Town meeting information, FYI Packet BREWSTER BUDGET OVERVIEW FISCAL YEAR 2022 RECOMMENDATIONS Peter Lombardi, Town Administrator Mimi Bernardo, Finance Director Donna Kalinick, Assistant Town Administrator Town of Brewster, Massachusetts February 8, 2021 Agenda •Review of Updated Revenue Assumptions •Summary of Expense Drivers and Major Changes •Presentation of Proposed Budget Initiatives •Summary of Budget Implications 02/08/21 2 FY21 Revenue Assumptions •New Growth - $200k based on Assessor’s analysis •State Aid (cherry sheet) – level funded at FY21 budgeted •Local Receipts – increased by 5.7% from very conservative FY21 assumptions •Short-term Rental Revenues - $500k based on FY21 actuals to date (+$400k from FY21) •New Solar Revenues to General Fund - $10k •Marijuana Revenues – still $0 •Ambulance Receipts – increase to $795k reflects all Fire Department operating expenses, including ambulance lease payments, from General Fund •Water and Golf Indirects - $150k and $129k respectively 02/08/21 3 Noteworthy Expense Drivers: Forecast to Actual •Health Insurance – projected at 5% overall increase; actual 2.8% premium increase, plus applied 50% of savings from 1 month premium holiday •Cape Cod Tech – anticipate 1.5% operating increase BUT 41% increase in Brewster enrollment (29 to 41 students) leads to $266k assessment increase •Nauset Regional – anticipate 2.5% operating increase, but enrollment increased by .26% •Brewster Elementary Schools – 4.1% increase for Stony Brook and 4.8% decrease at Eddy School •Compensated Absences (Employee Benefits) – contractual obligations due to retiring Town employees •$64k difference in levy capacity between FY22 forecast and recommended budget 02/08/21 4 FY22 Proposed Budget Initiatives •Creating Human Resources Department •Assistant Town Administrator for Personnel and Social Services will become new HR Director •Adding new part-time HR Generalist position (19 hours/week) •Project Manager position will replace outgoing 2nd Asst TA, which will help build organizational capacity to manage complex initiatives •Net impact (including all benefits) on General Fund budget of $119k, $23k of which will come online in FY23 (pension) •Comprehensive HR audit completed in 2020 with state grant funds provides a roadmap •Consistent with 2016 Government Study Report, 2019 MA Department of Revenue Report, FY21-22 Select Board Strategic Plan Goal G-5, and broad organizational consensus based on value in better supporting our ~150 Town FTEs 02/08/21 5 FY22 Proposed Budget Initiatives •Investing new short-term rental revenues in housing and long-term tax relief, as follows: •$250k to Brewster Affordable Housing Trust •$200k to Capital Stabilization Fund to help mitigate tax impact of future major Town capital projects (not included in forecast) •Continuing commitment to address Town’s unfunded Other Post-Employment Benefit (OPEB) liability - $300k total FY22 appropriation to Trust Fund •Supporting Year 1 of 3-Year plan to shift 3 remaining part- time (27 hour/week) Library positions to full-time (35 hours/week) •8 additional hours for Assistant Reference Librarian in FY21 will be split 50/50 between General Fund and Library State Aid 02/08/21 6 FY22 Proposed Budget Initiatives •Shifting ongoing capital obligations into operating budget where possible •+$25k ($75k total) in Road/Drainage Maintenance (DPW) to cover costs of catch basin cleaning, street sweeping, disposal of materials, line striping, etc. •+$15k ($20k total) in Tree Removal/Plantings (DPW) •$15k in Irrigation Maintenance (DPW) •Increasing investment in technology platforms (e- permitting, new website, remote meetings, payroll, etc) and infrastructure/cybersecurity - +$60k 02/08/21 7 FY22 Budget: Other Noteworthy Items •Cape Cod Tech School Debt Exclusion amount increased by 39% due to enrollment shift even though debt is structured as level principal •Similar to FY21, Departmental Budgets include contractual step increases only •Anticipated Cost of Living Adjustment and other potential contractual obligations for all Town employees as well as a funding for wage adjustments resulting from the findings of the compensation and classification study are included as a separate line in Employee Benefits since collective bargaining agreements and Personnel Bylaws expire in June 2021 02/08/21 8 FY22 Revenue Projection 02/08/21 9 FY 2017 Budget FY 2017 Actuals FY 2018 Budget FY 2018 Actuals FY 2019 Budget FY 2019 Actuals FY 2020 Budget FY 2020 Actuals FY 2021 Budget FY 2022 Recommended REVENUES Real Estate Taxes Prior Yr Property Tax Limit 28,517,123 28,517,123 29,589,263 29,589,263 30,648,080 30,648,080 31,766,927 31,766,927 33,179,551 34,389,776 2.5% Levy Growth 712,928 712,928 739,732 739,732 766,202 766,202 794,173 794,173 829,489 859,744 New Growth 200,000 359,212 175,000 319,085 160,239 354,749 200,000 309,571 380,736 200,000 Operating Override 0 0 0 0 0 0 309,000 309,000 0 0 Levy Limit 29,430,051 29,589,263 30,503,995 30,648,080 31,574,521 31,769,031 33,070,100 33,179,671 34,389,776 35,449,520 Debt Exclusions- Town 761,949 761,949 1,462,481 1,462,481 1,931,715 1,931,715 2,388,797 2,388,797 1,569,744 1,525,734 Debt Exclusions- Schools 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 417,386 532,355 Cape Cod Comm. Asses.152,751 152,751 156,807 156,807 160,727 160,727 168,354 168,354 172,565 176,879 Current Yr Property Tax Levy 30,344,751 30,503,963 32,123,283 32,267,368 33,666,963 33,861,473 35,627,251 35,736,822 36,549,471 37,684,488 Other Revenues 0 Cherry Sheet (State Aid)1,788,487 1,803,736 1,823,400 1,816,675 1,840,629 1,843,319 1,868,238 1,883,186 1,830,709 1,865,602 Estimated Local Receipts 3,900,277 4,981,841 4,821,120 5,369,046 5,134,184 5,641,090 4,608,942 5,092,266 4,419,852 4,669,935 Short Term Rentals Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 247,266 100,000 500,000 Free Cash 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Overlay Surplus 125,000 125,000 0 0 0 0 50,000 50,000 0 0 Transfers In To General Fund 0 Waterways RRFA 0 0 0 0 0 0 5,000 5,000 0 0 Cable RRFA 13,000 13,000 0 0 0 0 7,200 7,200 7,200 7,200 Telecomm. Revolving 67,626 67,626 0 0 0 0 65,000 65,000 66,625 80,000 Road Betterments RRFA 145,882 145,882 0 0 0 0 151,436 151,436 136,224 74,185 Septic Betterments SRF 10,000 Ambulance RRFA 300,410 300,410 0 0 0 0 0 700,550 795,550 Transfer fr Special Revenue 365,953 365,953 0 0 0 0 154,400 154,400 0 0 Bond Premium Amortization 47,814 47,814 0 0 0 0 35,810 35,810 32,371 28,931 Indirect Costs from Water 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 130,000 130,026 150,002 Indirect Costs from Golf 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 114,967 129,324 TOTAL REVENUES 37,099,200 38,355,225 38,767,803 39,453,089 40,641,776 41,345,882 42,573,277 43,558,386 44,087,995 45,995,218 FY22 Proposed Expenditure Summary 02/08/21 10 FY 2017 Budget FY 2017 Actuals FY 2018 Budget FY 2018 Actuals FY 2019 Budget FY 2019 Actuals FY 2020 Budget FY 2020 Actuals FY 2021 Budget FY 2022 Recommended EXPENDITURES Cherry Sheet Charges 656,880 611,991 635,036 657,501 679,088 615,511 624,563 626,188 657,402 647,191 Overlay Reserve 400,000 436,078 200,000 216,477 200,000 211,554 400,000 400,000 125,000 225,000 Operating Budget General Govt 2,013,959 1,791,960 2,125,908 1,954,177 2,339,099 2,119,077 2,143,191 1,875,143 2,306,556 2,441,636 Public Safety 5,307,505 5,192,549 5,256,274 5,218,174 5,447,941 5,374,323 5,874,780 5,432,597 6,580,602 6,753,876 Education 17,983,836 17,352,360 18,440,571 17,709,775 19,130,846 18,504,660 19,591,056 19,209,737 20,690,108 21,375,299 Public Works 1,787,379 1,714,798 1,848,681 1,950,561 2,080,586 1,934,113 1,892,521 1,774,993 2,117,172 2,184,795 Human Services 583,080 568,983 703,465 695,681 755,990 749,734 839,506 824,506 884,471 887,666 Culture & Recreation 711,924 706,498 803,774 798,220 892,494 868,383 910,426 844,854 925,400 946,492 Debt 1,445,918 1,669,624 1,509,449 1,614,449 2,313,310 2,233,660 2,899,521 2,258,832 2,122,287 2,007,298 Local Assessments 0 0 11,280 11,280 12,190 12,190 15,840 15,840 15,840 15,840 Employee Benefits 5,310,580 5,178,097 5,488,935 5,327,971 5,826,281 5,614,244 6,365,746 5,759,242 6,335,501 6,858,007 Utilities 430,088 365,104 337,123 289,636 456,473 374,315 417,171 405,817 425,171 443,671 Liability Insurance 460,050 421,309 426,616 421,409 437,789 387,455 393,000 464,105 445,000 467,250 Subtotal Operating Expenses:36,034,319 34,961,282 36,952,077 35,991,333 39,692,999 38,172,153 41,342,758 38,865,664 42,848,107 44,381,830 Transfer to Capital Stabilization 200,000 Transfer to Housing Trust 100,000 250,000 Transfer to OPEB Trust 200,000 222,671 267,000 Transfer to Stabilization 200,000 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 37,091,199 36,009,352 37,787,113 36,865,311 40,572,087 38,999,218 42,367,321 40,191,852 44,053,180 45,971,021 FY22 Budget Bottom-Line •Estimated FY22 revenue totals, including $500k in new short-term rental revenues, are $45,995,218 •Recommended FY22 operating appropriations currently total $45,971,021, including: •$267,000 General Fund transfer to OPEB Trust Fund consistent with OPEB Financial Policy ($300k total annual contribution with appropriations by Golf and Water Departments) •$200,000 General Fund transfer to Capital Stabilization Fund consistent with Financial Reserves Policy •$250,000 General Fund transfer to Brewster Affordable Housing Trust from new rental revenues consistent with FY21-22 Select Board Strategic Plan Goal H-1 •3.35% operating budget increase, not including $450k in one-time transfers to Capital Stabilization and BAHT •$24k projected levy capacity 02/08/21 11 FY21-22 Select Board Strategic Plan Vision Building Block Goal #Goal Description Higher Priority Timeline Vision Plan FY20-21 SB Plan Primary Responsible Party Other Key Stakeholders Community Character CC-1 Determine policy position on potential changes to Community Preservation Act fund allocation formula X FY21 Community Preservation Committee Select Board; Finance Committee; Open Space Committee; Affordable Housing Trust; Historical Commission; Recreation Commission CC-2 Develop plan to identify/address issues of diversity and inclusion, including potential formation of task force or advisory committee FY21 Select Board & Town Administration Affordable Housing Trust; All Citizens Access Committee; Police Chief CC-3 Engage stakeholders to determine policy position on residential exemption and other potential local tax relief policy options FY21-22 X X Tax Relief Working Group Select Board; Finance Committee; Board of Assessors; Brewster Association of Part-Time Residents CC-4 Continue to implement Age-Friendly Community Action Plan and modify as needed FY21-22 X X Council on Aging Board & Dept Select Board; Town Administration Open Space OS-1 Complete Drummer Boy Park Master Plan Update in coordination with proposed Wing Island boardwalk project X FY21-22 X X Drummer Boy Park Advisory Committee Select Board; Town Administration OS-2 Develop and execute updated plan for Dog Park project (requires future discussion to determine whether to include in Strategic Plan)??X X Dog Park Committee Select Board; Town Administration; Friends of Brewster Dog Park; Community Preservation Committee Housing H-1 Identify Affordable Housing Trust operating/capital needs, develop funding plan, and establish permanent funding mechanism X FY21 X X Affordable Housing Trust & Finance Team Select Board; Finance Committee H-2 Establish housing rehabilitation program and long-term rental assistance program X FY21 X X Affordable Housing Trust Town Administration; Housing Coordinator H-3 Develop affordable housing off Millstone Road X FY21-22 X X Affordable Housing Trust Select Board; Community Preservation Committee; Town Administration; Housing Coordinator Local Economy LE-1 Complete and launch electronic permitting platform, and develop Guide to Doing Business in Brewster to assist residents, contractors, and businesses in navigating local permitting processes FY21-22 X Town Administration IT Director; Building Dept; Health Dept; Planning Dept LE-2 Consider designating Underpass Road as District of Critical Planning Concern with Cape Cod Commission FY22 X X Town Planner Planning Board; Select Board; Town Administration Coastal Management CM-1 Complete gap analysis of local land use regulations along the coastal bank and assess merits of Cape Cod Commission model bylaw FY21 X Town Planner Natural Resources Commission & Dept; Planning Board; Conservation Commission; Board of Health & Dept CM-2 Support new Natural Resources Commission in implementing the Coastal Resource Management Plan and other similar initiatives FY21-22 X Natural Resources Dept Select Board; Town Administration CM-3 Work with MA Department of Conservation and Recreation on Rail Trail extension across Route 6A down to Linnell Landing FY21-22 X X Town Administration Natural Resources Dept; Dept of Public Works; Legislative Delegation; Cape Cod Commission CM-4 Investigate feasibility of new aquaculture program off Wing Island and update related Department of Natural Resources regulations as necessary FY22 X Natural Resources Dept Select Board; Town Administration Water Resources WR-1 Develop clear timeline/plan for moving water quality initiatives forward and determine whether to remain in Cape Cod and Islands Water Quality Protection Fund FY21 X X Water Quality Working Group Select Board WR-2 Identify preferred approach(es) to best address nitrogen and phosphorus mitigation in environmentally sensitive areas FY21-22 X X Water Quality Working Group Board of Health; Conservation Commission; Brewster Ponds Coalition WR-3 Develop and propose stormwater management bylaw (MS4 permit)FY21-22 X X Stormwater Working Group Planning Board; Select Board WR-4 Evaluate vulnerable Water Department utility infrastructure, determine possible improvements/modifications, and implement as possible/applicable FY22 X Water Dept Town Administration 1 FY21-22 Select Board Strategic Plan Vision Building Block Goal #Goal Description Higher Priority Timeline Vision Plan FY20-21 SB Plan Primary Responsible Party Other Key Stakeholders Governance G-1 Present the annual budget in an easily accessible format and provide detailed review of Town's financial status on regular basis X FY21 X X Finance Team Select Board; Finance Committee G-2 Complete design/launch of new, more user friendly Town website and optimize BGTV’s potential as communication tool X FY21 X X Website Working Group Town Administration G-3 Adopt financial policies that are in accordance with 2019 MA Department of Revenue report and best practices, and implement short- and medium-term recommendations of DOR report as applicable X FY21-22 X Finance Team Select Board; Finance Committee G-4 Continue to implement Vision Plan and develop Local Comprehensive Plan that addresses the following key policy issues: 1. Develop a high-level growth policy 2. Identify and evaluate policies / zoning bylaws that recognize and take advantage of potential synergies between affordable housing development and open space preservation 3. Perform a comprehensive review of zoning bylaws, with particular attention to ones that support more housing choice X FY21-22 X X Vision Planning Committee Planning Board; Town Planner; Select Board; Affordable Housing Trust; Open Space Committee G-5 Update Select Board Policy on Board and Committee meetings to improve transparency and provide better access to information FY21 X X Town Administration Select Board; IT Director; BGTV G-6 Identify funding to support creation of new Human Resource Department to focus on the following key initiatives: 1. Implement findings from HR audit 2. Develop succession plans for key staff positions 3. Complete compensation and classification study and related staffing analysis of all union and non-union Town personnel, and implement recommended changes 4. Foster a culture that views residents as customers and Town services as the product - be proactive, transparent, and engaged FY21-22 X Town Administration Select Board G-7 Develop and seek adoption of Town Charter and associated bylaw changes FY21-22 X Charter Committee Select Board; Town Counsel; Boards/Committees & Town Depts G-8 Foster stronger relationships with Nauset School District officials, especially regarding finances FY21-22 Town Administration Select Board; Finance Committee; Nauset Regional School Committee; Brewster School Committee; Nauset School Administration G-9 Actively recruit residents to fill vacancies and provide training/ guidance to volunteers serving on Town Boards and Committees FY21-22 X X Select Board & Town Administration Town Counsel G-10 Determine merits of making longer-term changes to traditional municipal service models – applying lessons learned from pandemic response FY21-22 Town Administration Select Board; Dept Heads 2 FY21-22 Select Board Strategic Plan Vision Building Block Goal #Goal Description Higher Priority Timeline Vision Plan FY20-21 SB Plan Primary Responsible Party Other Key Stakeholders Community Infrastructure CI-1 Complete School Consolidation and Community Center Feasibility Studies via a transparent and engaging public process and work with key stakeholders to determine appropriate next steps X FY21-22 X X Community Center Planning Committee; Nauset School Officials Council on Aging & Dept; Recreation Commission & Dept; Brewster Elementary Schools; Local/Regional Social Service Agencies (Veterans, etc) CI-2 Determine support for the Brewster Ladies Library renovation project FY21 Select Board Brewster Ladies Library Association Board and Dept; Town Administration; Capital Planning Committee; Finance Committee CI-3 Complete comprehensive assessment of Captains Golf operations, finances, and capital needs, and determine feasibility of transitioning to enterprise fund FY21-22 Golf Dept & Finance Team Golf Commission; Select Board; Finance Committee CI-4 Implement 5 Year Green Community Energy Reduction Plan, manage ongoing solar projects with assistance from new Energy Manager, and reduce greenhouse emissions whenever possible FY21-22 Town Administration Select Board; Energy Committee; Facilities Manager CI-5 Complete Hazard Mitigation Plan and seek to implement Municipal Vulnerability Preparedness projects that support climate change adaptation FY21-22 X Town Planner & Town Administration Dept of Public Works; Natural Resources Dept; Water Dept; Fire Dept CI-6 Continue to invest in road infrastructure in the following key areas: 1. Complete design and construction of Millstone Road 2. Develop Complete Streets Prioritization Plan and seek project grant funding 3. Complete update to Pavement Management Plan 4. Develop comprehensive Road Capital Plan & consider merits of seeking 2nd major road bond FY21-22 X X Town Administration & Dept of Public Works Select Board; Capital Planning Committee Pandemic Response & Recovery PR-1 Continue to deliver essential services to residents while reducing risk of coronavirus transmission in all municipal activities, properties, and facilities X FY21-22 Town Administration Select Board; Town Depts PR-2 Communicate effectively with the public, town employees/volunteers, business community, and visitors about town policies/actions related to the pandemic X FY21-22 Town Administration & Health Dept Select Board; Town Depts PR-3 Encourage and facilitate voting by mail for upcoming elections, and implement pandemic safety measures for in-person voting at elections and Town Meeting FY21 Town Administration & Town Clerk Town Depts PR-4 Determine and implement best approach to Board/Committee meetings FY21 Select Board & Town Administration BGTV; Facilities Manager PR-5 Communicate and coordinate local response/recovery efforts with regional partners FY21-22 Town Administration Select Board PR-6 Continue to monitor and support employee wellness FY21-22 Town Administration Select Board; Dept Heads 3 DRAFT 02.05.22 TOWN OF BREWSTER BUDGET & TOWN MEETING CALENDAR FISCAL YEAR 2022 1.November 9, 2020: FY21 Capital requests due to Town Administrator and Finance Director. 2.November 12, 2020: Capital Planning Committee meets to review FY21 Capital requests. 3.November 18, 2020: FY22-26 Budget forecast presentation to Select Board and Finance Committee, including recommended FY22 budget development guidelines. 4.December 15, 2020: FY22-25 Capital requests due to Town Administrator and Finance Director. 5.December 23, 2020: FY22 Town Operating Budget requests due to Town Administrator and Finance Director. 6.Weeks of January 4 and 11, 2021: Preliminary budget reviews by the Town Administrator and Finance Director with Departments and Boards/Commissions. 7.January 28, 2021: Deadline for Capital Planning Committee to finalize FY21-25 Capital Improvement Program. 8.February 8, 2021: FY22 Town Operating Budget Overview delivered to the Select Board and Finance Committee. 9.February 10, 2021: Department Head budget presentations to Select Board and Finance Committee. 10. February 16, 2021: Capital Planning Committee presentation to Select Board and Finance Committee on FY21-25 Capital Improvement Plan and supplemental FY21 Capital requests. DRAFT 02.05.22 11. March 1, 2021: Town Code final deadline for submittal of warrant articles for inclusion within the 2021 Annual Town Meeting warrant. 12. February 24, 2021: Schools (Nauset and Cape Cod Tech) budget presentations to Select Board and Finance Committee. 13.March 30, 2021: District-wide vote on proposed Nauset Regional High School project 14.March 31, 2021: Administrative deadline to finalize warrant articles for the May 2021 Special and Annual Town Meetings. 15. April 7, 2021: Deadline for Select Board’s and Finance Committee’s recommendations on the May 2021 Special and Annual Town Meeting warrant articles. 16.April 9, 2021: Send the May 2021 Special & Annual Town Meeting warrants to the printer. 17. April 24, 2021: Deadline to post warrants. 18.April 20, 2021: Deadline for Select Board to place a ballot question on the Annual Town Election. 19. April 28, 2021: FY22 Budget and Town Meeting warrant book distributed to the general public as an insert in the Cape Codder and on the Town’s website. 20. May 11, 2021: Town Meeting public information session. 21.May 15, 2021: 2021 Special and Annual Town Meeting held at Stony Brook Elementary School. 22.May 25, 2021: 2021 Annual Town Election. 91150608v.1 Nauset Regional School District Suggested Debt Exclusion Question for the Member Towns Shall the Town of Brewster be allowed to exempt from the provisions of proposition two and one-half, so-called, the amounts required to pay its allocable share of the bonds issued by the Nauset Regional School District to pay costs of renovating and adding to Nauset Regional High School, located at 100 Cable Road, North Eastham, Massachusetts, including the payment of all costs incidental or related thereto? SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT TO BREWSTER FINCOM FINALIZED JANUARY 2021 Is the $132 million project proposed by the Nauset Regional School Committee worthy of Brewster FINCOM and taxpayer support? NAUSET REGIONAL HIGH SCHOOL BUILDING PROJECT REPORT OF FINCOM SUBCOMMITTEE ON NAUSET REGIONAL HIGH SCHOOL PROJECT – 1/20/21 1 | Page Background on Sub-Committee 1. The Nauset Regional High School (NRHS) subcommittee of the Brewster Finance Committee was formed in December of 2019 to focus on the proposed project to renovate and expand the regional high school and provide input to the Finance Committee in its deliberations and final vote on the project. 2. Prior to and subsequent to the formation of the subcommittee, the Brewster Finance Committee (FINCOM) met and attended a number of presentations held to inform all stakeholders in the project including: • A joint presentation by the NRHS Building Committee to FINCOM and the Select Board on July 22, 2019 • A public presentation by the NRHS Building Committee and the Owner’s Project Manager on August 25, 2019 • A presentation made by Nauset Regional School Committee (NRSC) and NRHS Building Committee members on October 2, 2019 • A public presentation made by Jack McCarthy of the MSBA on November 19, 2019 • A presentation to FINCOM by NRS Committee members Chris Easley and Jim O’Leary on December 2, 2019 • A joint presentation by the NRHS Building committee to FINCOM and the Select Board on January 20, 2020. The subcommittee met with members of the NRSC, NRHS Building Committee, Superintendent Conrad and the finance staff of Nauset Regional School Administration on two occasions in October and November 2019. The subcommittee has met seven times since its formation in December 2019. 3. Once the full range of considerations is addressed, the key decision that needs to be made is whether the project proposed by the Nauset Regional School Committee is worthy of Brewster FINCOM and taxpayer support. Current State of NRHS 4. The current NRHS is 50 years old and requires substantial work on its infrastructure. 5. Only one major project has been done since it was originally constructed. 6. It is not fully compliant with the American Disabilities Act (ADA) and has other code violations. REPORT OF FINCOM SUBCOMMITTEE ON NAUSET REGIONAL HIGH SCHOOL PROJECT – 1/20/21 2 | Page Project Size and Scope 7. The proposed project scope involves a combination of renovation and new construction. The total project cost is estimated at $132 million. The Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA) has reviewed the project and committed to a contribution of $36 million. 8. The School Committee proposes to issue bonds for some period of time (20 to 30 years) to fund the $96 million if voters in the region/district approve the project and thereby agree to fund the debt. (APPENDIX 1/1A – COMMENTS PREPARED BY R. YOUNG FOR SELECT BOARD REGARDING IMPACT OF 20, 25, 30 YEAR SCENARIOS AND SUPPORTING ANALYSIS) 9. All funding for the bonds or debt service would be the responsibility of taxpayers in the four towns forming the region/district. 10. Taxpayers who are currently legally bound by their respective Select Boards to participate in the Nauset region/district are those residing in Brewster, Orleans, Wellfleet and Eastham. 11. These taxpayers will have the opportunity to vote on whether or not to approve the NRHS project as approved by MSBA when it is presented on the ballot on March 30, 2021. 12. The project as proposed and designed is the ONLY option for voters to consider on the March 30, 2021 ballot. 13. The maximum student enrollment approved by the MSBA as the basis for the project is 905. (APPENDIX 2 – MEMO TO FINCOM DATED 6/30/20 FROM F. BRIDGES REGARDING NRHS PROJECT AND INTER-DISTRICT SCHOOL CHOICE) 14. The Superintendent has strongly supported the need for a school population this size as critical to robust programming, diversity, and essential for effective recruitment and utilization of full-time teachers. Student Utilization of NRHS 15. Actual student volume at NRHS for FY 2020 was as follows: Brewster* 281 31% Eastham, Wellfleet, and Orleans* 335 36% Provincetown and Truro 86 9% CHOICE – other towns 219 24% Total 921 100% *4 TOWNS IN DISTRICT = 67% OF STUDENT VOLUME REPORT OF FINCOM SUBCOMMITTEE ON NAUSET REGIONAL HIGH SCHOOL PROJECT – 1/20/21 3 | Page 16. Average enrollment from the 4 towns in the district as well as the tuition towns (Provincetown and Truro) decreased 2% each year since 2010 while enrollment of CHOICE students increased an average of 4% per year. Enrollment in 2020 is comprised as follows: 67% of the youth are from the 4 towns in the district; 33% are from outside the district (9% from Provincetown and Truro; 24% are CHOICE. (see chart in #15 above) 17. While the total budget increased 29% over these 10 years (averaging 3% per year), the budget per enrolled student increased 39% over the period or an average of 4% per year as student enrollment decreased an average of 1% per year. (see CHART 1 on following page) 18. The MSBA performed a demographic study supporting the 905-enrollment figure including an expectation a 1% decline per year for students within the district. 19. The MSBA data shows a 4-1/2% decline in the student population between 2017 and the end of construction in 2025. 20. We cannot determine the impact on enrollment of the multiple affordable housing initiatives across the 4 towns in the region/district. In Brewster the Habitat for Humanity community has added families with children to the town’s student population. The Millstone project will also likely add students. 21. Eastham and Orleans have similar projects that will be coming online. Financial Considerations 22. The School Committee makes a decision each year whether to continue the CHOICE program and the number of students to accept in each grade. 23. Of the four towns in the Nauset regional system, Brewster funds the largest percentage of NRHS costs at nearly half based on the percentage of its student enrollment the prior year in relation to the other 3 district towns (see #15 for chart 281/616=47%). 24. As a result, Brewster would be obligated for about $45 million of the $96 million estimated project debt. Brewster’s financial obligation will vary based on its student enrollment as percentage total enrollment from the four district towns. 25. The project impacts taxpayers in three ways: operating budgets, capital budgets and debt service. 26. Two five-year tuition agreements were executed in April 2019 with the towns of Provincetown and Truro in which the two towns agree to an annual payment of $18,457 per student (flat fee) through the end of 2024 school year. This fee is increased annually by 2- 1/2% for the first four years and 3-1/2 % in the final year. 27. The agreement does not require full operating costs or capital costs reimbursement nor does it include any obligation to fund debt service on any major projects including this project. 28. CHOICE students are students from towns throughout Cape Cod who choose and are accepted to attend the Nauset Regional School District. State law effectively limits annual REPORT OF FINCOM SUBCOMMITTEE ON NAUSET REGIONAL HIGH SCHOOL PROJECT – 1/20/21 4 | Page operating budget reimbursement from the CHOICE student’s town of residence to $5k. State law does not require the sending district to fund capital costs or debt service for major projects. CHART 1 – CREATED FROM NRHS DATA TRENDS 2010-2020 KEY BUDGET AND ENROLLMENT STATISTICS FOR LAST DECADE AT NAUSET REGIONAL HIGH SCHOOL 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NRHS Budget (excludes Region, other expenses) NRHS BUDGET PER ENROLLMENT TOTAL NRHS ENROLLMENT Total NRHS 4 member towns enrollment Total NRHS member towns + tuition enrollment Total CHOICE enrollment 4 Member Towns as a % of TOTAL ENROLLMENT Provincetown and Truro Tuition as a % of TOTAL ENROLLMENT CHOICE as a% of TOTAL ENROLLMENT FY10 (09/10)$9,126,011 $9,190 993 800 840 153 81%4% 15% FY11 $9,059,459 $9,179 987 737 819 168 75%8% 17% FY12 $9,436,281 $9,779 965 696 780 185 72%9% 19% FY13 $9,725,011 $10,026 970 695 780 190 72%9% 20% FY14 $10,250,107 $10,010 1024 706 810 214 69% 10% 21% FY15 $10,730,685 $11,017 974 687 777 197 71%9% 20% FY16 $10,968,281 $11,181 981 676 772 209 69% 10% 21% FY17 $11,131,812 $11,780 945 642 734 211 68% 10% 22% FY18 $11,086,421 $11,998 924 603 688 236 65%9% 26% FY19 $11,468,531 $12,149 944 624 716 228 66% 10% 24% FY20 $11,781,018 $12,792 921 616 702 219 67%9% 24% % change FY10-FY20 29% 39% -7% -23% -16%43% AVERAGE PER YEAR 3% 4% -1% -2% -2%4% OBSERVATIONS: Total budget increased 29% over 10 years ......... or an average of 3% per year. Budget per student increased 39% over 10 years .....or an average of 4% per year; student enrollment has decreased an average of 1% per year. Average enrollment from 4 towns in district and tuition towns (Ptown and Truro) decreased 2% each year; CHOICE increased an average of 4% per year. Enrollment in 2020 is comprised of 67% youth from district and 33% outside the district (9% Ptown/Truro + 24% CHOICE). REPORT OF FINCOM SUBCOMMITTEE ON NAUSET REGIONAL HIGH SCHOOL PROJECT – 1/20/21 5 | Page 29. State law does stipulate some additional payment for costs associated with CHOICE students with special education needs. 30. The State law regarding financing/reimbursement for costs related to CHOICE students, known as the inter-district school choice, has not changed since its inception in 1991. 31. Although not required under the state law, the district provides transportation for CHOICE students. The district does not provide transportation for tuition students from Provincetown and Truro. 32. In a March 2020 memo, the district superintendent reports receiving $5,800 in operating revenues on average for CHOICE students representing a deficit per student in operating costs of $14,300 ($20,100 - $5,800). The $20,100 is the state reported average in-district expense/pupil for the Nauset district. 33. In total for FY 2018, the district reported receiving gross reimbursement/revenues of $1.5 million for the high school from CHOICE students. 34. The five-year agreement with Provincetown and Truro requires payment of approximately $1,643 less ($20,100-$18,457) than the actual cost per student, although Provincetown and Truro provide for their own transportation costs. 35. Taxpayers from the 4 towns in the region/district pay nearly $25,200 per district student per year in operating costs. The overall cost/student is about $20,100. District taxpayers are therefore paying $5,100 or 25% more per student than the average cost in order to subsidize unfunded costs for students from Provincetown and Truro as well as CHOICE students. 36. Over the last ten years (2010 to 2020), the NRHS did not request increases to its operating budget of more than 2.5% per year. 37. During this same 10-year period, total enrollment has decreased 7% and the total NRHS budget has increased 29%. This translates to budgeted costs per enrolled student increasing 39% during the period, and CHOICE students increasing from 15% to 24% of the total student population. Other Considerations 38. The Brewster Select Board has recommended a 25-year level debt repayment schedule to the NRS Committee but the Committee has not made its decision as to the term of the financing (20, 25 or 30 years). (APPENDIX 1/1A – COMMENTS PREPARED BY R. YOUNG FOR SELECT BOARD REGARDING IMPACT OF 20, 25, 30 YEAR SCENARIOS AND SUPPORTING ANALYSIS) 39. Assuming the NRS Committee approves the 25-year level debt repayment schedule, the annual property tax increase for the Brewster household with the median home value of REPORT OF FINCOM SUBCOMMITTEE ON NAUSET REGIONAL HIGH SCHOOL PROJECT – 1/20/21 6 | Page $461,500 is about $265, inclusive of the subsidy for students from Provincetown and Truro as well as CHOICE students. 40. Market interest rates are expected to be lower than those included in the project estimate. 41. Taxpayers have to choose between approving this project, which would commit them to both the capital cost of the proposed project and the annual operating costs associated with educating CHOICE and tuition students, OR rejecting the project knowing there is a risk that an alternate project could be presented for which the state MSBA refuses to provide funding, shifting the burden for 100% of the cost of the new project to the taxpayers. 42. If the current proposal is defeated and an alternate project is undertaken that eliminates and/or substantially reduces CHOICE and/or Provincetown/Truro student enrollment, the assumed $4-$5 million/year in operating cost savings from eliminating the subsidies and educating fewer students could effectively be used to fund the four district towns’ debt service costs for this alternate project. Assuming a 25-year bond term at a 2.25% interest rate, this $4-$5 million/year redirection of funds would support $80-$90 million in debt. When combined with any MSBA support, this combination could fund the entire alternate building project with zero property tax increase versus today. (APPENDIX 3/3A – MEMO AND ANALYSIS TO FINCOM DATED 1/19/21 PREPARED BY R. YOUNG REGARDING COST TO EDUCATE AND THE SUBSIDY BURDEN TO THE DISTRICT TAXPAYERS OF TUITION AND INTER- DISTRICT SCHOOL CHOICE STUDENTS) 43. If an alternate project, as described above, was developed, it is uncertain how much of the estimated CHOICE and tuition student-related subsidy savings could be realized. This analysis assumes that the NRSD in-district expense per pupil would remain at the state- reported average of $20,100, an amount that is 20% higher than the average total expense/pupil for the Top 25 Massachusetts high schools, as ranked by US News, and 9% higher than the Monomoy school district. A concrete determination as to whether this is a fair assumption could only be made after a new educational plan and new budgets based on the lower enrollment are developed by the NRS Committee. The magnitude of a budget cut that could be achieved without a negative impact on student educational outcomes is not known. 44. Although the Superintendent and NRS Committee have asserted that a student population of 900-1000 is needed for a robust program and excellent education, 1/3 of the Top 25 and Top 50 Massachusetts high schools, as ranked by US News, have fewer than 750 students, and 1/4 of the Top 50 have fewer than 500 students. (APPENDIX 4 – ANALYSIS OF STATISTICS OF US NEWS MASSACHUSETTS TOP 25/TOP 50 RANKED HIGH SCHOOLS) REPORT OF FINCOM SUBCOMMITTEE ON NAUSET REGIONAL HIGH SCHOOL PROJECT – 1/20/21 7 | Page PROS AND CONS OF APPROVING NAUSET REGIONAL HIGH SCHOOL PROJECT AS PRESENTED TO VOTERS PROS (Reasons to Vote for the Project) CONS (Reasons to Vote against the Project) Significant issues and concerns at current 50 year old school will be resolved in 3 to 5 years to include compliance with code and ADA. 905 Student capacity supports leadership desire for more diverse student population and more robust curriculum. Project is underway; 3 years of planning and design work has been completed and project has received approval from the MSBA; failure to approve could result in delays and potential increases in interest and construction costs. State commitment of this project will offset some of the anticipated $132m costs of the project. The net cost of the project after receipt of the $36m from MSBA ($96m) is approximately the same cost as bringing the existing structures to code ($98m). Commitment to 905 enrollment as basis for project plan solidifies a long term commitment by the School Committee to accepting greater numbers of CHOICE students outside the 4 towns in the district burdening the taxpayers with major subsidies for these students (currently $4-$5 million per year). These savings could be used to fund $80-$90 million toward an alternative project – higher than the $36 million MSBA contribution. Voter rejection of the project would necessitate resubmission of an alternative project to the MSBA. There is no guarantee that a NRHS project would be reconsidered by MSBA in the next few years. Provincetown and Truro (tuition students) are not part of the region/district. While they have agreed to pay a tuition fee, they have not committed to paying full operating cost, capital or any debt service costs. The $1.3 m in taxpayer funds spent on the feasibility study for the project as approved by MSBA cannot be recouped. Brewster will send about 1/3 of the student population but will pay for about 1/2 of the school project. APPENDIX 1 COMMENTS BY ROBERT YOUNG, BREWSTER FINANCE COMMITTEE MADE TO THE BREWSTER SELECT BOARD NOVEMBER 2019 I would like to share an analysis that I have done with regard to the NRHS building project bond financing term. I performed this analysis with the thought that we need to consider the town’s annual debt servicing requirements in light of the NRHS project as well as other projects that can be reasonably anticipated - as well as those that we can’t foresee. This is not to prejudge support for any of these projects, but to better understand the flexibility a longer bond financing term would provide. The bottom line is that the longer the term of the bond for NRHS, the more flexibility the town would have with regard to financing other projects without stressing the town budget or further burdening taxpayers. This is because, although total interest payments would be greater, the annual debt service cost would be less, thereby reducing the size of the required property tax increase. I believe this should be a key consideration for the Select Board in its recommendation to the School Committee that will ultimately decide the NRHS project bond financing term. I appreciate that the Select Board voted to recommend a 20 year bond term at its 11/4/2019 meeting, but I think this additional information and analysis needs to be presented so that the Select Board can reconsider this position. The schedules that were provided to the Select Board provided scenarios for 20, 25, and 30 year bond terms and assumed interest rates of 4.25%, 4.75%, and 5.00%, respectively. The 20 year scenario calculated Brewster’s annual debt service payment at $3,387,681.94. The 25 year scenario’s annual payment equaled $3,116,110.31. The 30 year scenario’s annual payment equaled $2,929,259.75. So, the 25 year scenario would result in annual debt service payments $271,571.63 less than the 20 year scenario, and the 30 year scenario would result in annual debt service payments $458,422.19 less than the 20 year scenario. These annual reduced debt service requirements would then be available to fund future bond issuance to support other projects without increasing the tax burden beyond what’s currently contemplated with a 20 year NRHS bond term. How much debt capacity would this provide? If we continue to use the scenario’s extremely conservative interest rate assumptions, the $271k would support about $3.6MM in borrowing for a 20 year term, $3.9MM for a 25 year term, and $4.2MM for a 30 year term. The $458k would support about $6MM in borrowing for a 20 year term, $6.6MM for a 25 year term, and $7MM for a 30 year term. We can revise this analysis using today’s actual municipal bond interest rates to paint an even more compelling picture. AA rated municipal bond interest rates are about 2.20% for 20 year financing, 2.3% for 25 year financing, and 2.40% for 30 year financing. Using these interest rates and Brewster’s assumed portion of the NRHS bond results in the following: For a 20 year term, annual debt service equals $2,807,313.24. For a 25 year term, annual debt service equals $2,388,473.46. For a 30 year term, annual debt service equals $2,122,835.67. So, the 25 year scenario would result in annual debt service payments $418,839.78 less than the 20 year scenario, and the 30 year scenario would result in annual debt service payments $684,477.57 less than the 20 year scenario - lowering the annual debt service cost even more than using the extremely conservative interest rates in the Unibank scenarios. Again, these annual reduced debt service requirements would then be available to fund future bond issuance to support other projects without increasing the tax burden beyond what’s currently contemplated with a 20 year NRHS bond term. Assuming today’s municipal bond interest rates, the $418k would support about $6.7MM in borrowing for a 20 year term, $7.9MM for a 25 year term, and $8.9MM for a 30 year term. The $684k would support about $11MM in borrowing for a 20 year term, $12.9MM for a 25 year term, and $14.5MM for a 30 year term. The upside of longer borrowing terms is greater financial flexibility in the future for other anticipated and unforeseen projects. When considered on an individual median value homeowner basis, the annual savings from extending the term don’t appear substantial (about $30-$50/year). However, when looked at collectively, the ability to substantially fund future projects without placing any further burden on the taxpayer beyond what is contemplated by the 20 year financing for the NRHS project is compelling. The clear downside is that the total amount of interest paid would be substantially greater. However, interest rates are at historic lows, and locking in very long term financing for a very long term asset is prudent financial management. There is also the rationale that extending the tenor to 30 years is a matter of fairness given that this would mean the burden of the financing would be spread over more/different taxpayers as homeowners arrive in and leave Brewster. Assumptions: Total project cost to taxpayers from all 4 member communities of $97MM (assumes $140MM total project cost less $43MM MSBA subsidy) Current 46.4225% contribution of Brewster taxpayers, based on FY20 student enrollment figures (which adjusts every year based on updated actuals) Current Brewster median home valuation of $445,000 Current (FY20) total assessed property valuation of $4,121,908,120 4121908120 3400000 0.000824861 367.0630096 176.1902446 20 year term Conservative rate scenario Current rate scenario 25 year versus 20 year bond Conservative rate scenario Current rate scenario Interest rate 4.25%2.20%Annual reduction in debt service $271.6k $418.8k Total Debt Service $145.9MM $120.9MM Add'l debt capacity on a 20 year bond $3.6MM $6.7MM Total Interest $48.9MM $23.9MM Add'l debt capacity on a 25 year bond $3.9MM $7.9MM Impact to the Tax Rate $0.82/1000 $0.68/1000 Add'l debt capacity on a 30 year bond $4.2MM $8.9MM Annual Impact to the Tax Bill $365/year $303/year Total Paid by Median Homeowner $7,313 $6,062 30 year versus 20 year bond Conservative rate scenario Current rate scenario Brewster annual debt service $3.4MM $2.8MM Annual reduction in debt service $458.4k $684.5k Add'l debt capacity on a 20 year bond $6.0MM $11.0MM 25 year term Conservative rate scenario Current rate scenario Add'l debt capacity on a 25 year bond $6.6MM $12.9MM Interest rate 4.75%2.30%Add'l debt capacity on a 30 year bond $7.0MM $14.5MM Total Debt Service $167.8MM $128.6MM Total Interest $70.7MM $31.6MM Impact to the Tax Rate $0.76/1000 $0.58/1000 Annual Impact to the Tax Bill $336/year $258/year Total Paid by Median Homeowner $8,408 $6,446 Brewster annual debt service $3.1MM $2.4MM 30 year term Conservative rate scenario Current rate scenario Interest rate 5.00%2.40% Total Debt Service $189.3MM $137.2MM Total Interest $92.3MM $40.2MM Impact to the Tax Rate $0.71/1000 $0.52/1000 Annual Impact to the Tax Bill $316/year $229/year Total Paid by Median Homeowner $9,487 $6,875 Brewster annual debt service $2.9MM $2.1MM NRHS BOND TERM SCENARIOS AND DEBT CAPACITY ANALYSIS CONSERVATIVE RATE VERSUS CURRENT RATE SCENARIOS ADD'L DEBT CAPACITY WITHOUT INCREASING TAXES BEYOND 20 YEAR BOND FINANCING APPENDIX 1A APPENDIX 2 Memo to: Brewster FINCOM Chair From: Frank Bridges Date June 30, 2020 Re: NRHS Project and Inter-School Choice In the June 29, 2020 Joint Brewster Select Board / Nauset Regional School Committee meeting, the Select Board reaffirmed its support for the project and directed the NRSC to move the vote for the project to the spring 2021 Town Meeting. After the Select Board vote, NRSC Chair Chris Easley stated that “school choice is not part of this building project” and further “it is something that has just come up and it is new”. As part of the NRHS Finance Subcommittee investigation I reviewed the minutes and videotape of the May, June and July 2017 NRSC meetings and the minutes of the August 2017 NRSC meeting. This information was going to be included in the subcommittee’s future report but in the light of Mr. Easley’s recent statements I provide it now. In February 2017, the Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA) invited the Nauset Regional School Committee (NRSC) to submit a statement of interest into the MSBA’s Eligibility Period. In the subsequent months the NRSC Committee met on several occasions to discuss the key components of the process – determining grade configuration of the facility and the student enrollment number on which the design would be based. In its public meetings in May, June, July and August of 2017, the Committee (of which Mr. Easley was a member and subsequently Chair) discussed these and other topics as part of the MSBA Modular 1 requirements. The Modular 1 criterion required the NRSC to submit a report to confirm the grade configuration and certified enrollment data of the high school to the MSBA by the end of August 2017.  At the May 11, 2017 meeting the Committee Chair stated that the Committee needed to address the size of the facility “700 or 1000 students” and to look into the impact of School Choice, and the tuition arrangements for Truro and Provincetown.  At the June 14, 2017 meeting the issues of grade configuration, Truro/Provincetown tuition enrollment and the Inter-District School Choice program were again determined to be crucial topics for further discussion. In particular the Superintendent indicated that the “towns have asked us to look at school choice students and look at our population”.  In the July 13, 2017 meeting the new Committee Chair (Mr. Easley) stated that long term effects of grade configuration would be deferred for future consideration, to be studied 5 or 10 years down the road. It was suggested that a subcommittee be formed for that study.  At the August 10, 2017 meeting, the Superintendent indicated that the MSBA representative had advised him that the deliberations of the NRSC meetings of June and July would satisfy MSBA Modular 1 requirements. The Committee then voted to 1) maintain the 9-12 configuration for the project and 2) maintain the Choice program in grades 6-12.  On November 8, 2017 the MSBA approved a 9-12 grade structure with an enrolled base of 905 students. Up until the MSBA’s Invitation to Eligibility to the NRS District in February 2017, it is my conclusion based on a review of the minutes and videotape, that the NRSC had viewed the Choice enrollment invitations as an annual decision that would impact the curriculum of the school and the annual operating budget. Because the existing facility had been designed to accommodate 1000+ students the Board considered only the marginal impact of Tuition and Choice students on its annual budget. I believe that when asking the Board to “look at school choice students and look at our population”, the towns were asking the Board to consider the impact of declining district enrollment and an increasing Choice enrollment on the District ’s long term capital requirements. It is not clear to me that the Board did so. The minutes and video of the Nauset Regional School Committee meetings show:  No discussion of the prior period enrollment declines  No discussion of the prior period Choice enrollment incr eases at NRHS  No discussion of requiring Truro and Provincetown’s inclusion into the NRSD Agreement  No discussion of amending the Tuition Agreements with Truro and Provincetown to provide for any future capital requirements related to their students (New 5 year tuition agreements for both towns were completed in April 2019 with 2.5% escalators in all but the last year, which will increase by 3.5%.) The inclusion of Choice students in the proposed enrollment base was the key determinant in all of the ensuing work done by the design team and resulted in the project under consideration by the towns. APPENDIX 3 COST TO EDUCATE AND THE SUBSIDY BURDEN TO THE DISTRICT TAXPAYERS OF TUITION AND INTER-DISTRICT SCHOOL CHOICE STUDENTS BY Robert Young, Brewster Finance Committee January 19, 2021 This is an analysis regarding the cost to educate each of the NRSD’s four member town’s pupils which then results in highlighting the subsidy the member town’s taxpayers pay for Inter- District School Choice students and Provincetown and Truro tuition students. The basis of the analysis is all public data from the MA Dept. of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) and the Nauset Regional School District (NRSD). It includes analyses of the two most recent fiscal years where all data was available for the NRSD - FY18 and FY19. Using FY 18 as an example, the analysis takes the NRSD’s total In-District expenses which DESE uses in calculating the NRSD’s In-District Expenditure per Pupil of $20,133 for the NRSD for that fiscal year. It then subtracts the revenues received from Choice reimbursements and Provincetown and Truro tuition. The remainder represents the balance of expenses that it takes to educate the member town’s pupils that must be covered by the four member towns. Using the same calculation method as DESE, the NRSD In-District Expenditure per Member Town Pupil was $25,162. The difference of $5,029 versus the $20,133 In-District Expenditure for all NRHS pupils represents the premium that the member towns are paying for each of their 1,022 pupils as a result of the 347 Choice and 108 Tuition students in the district contributing less than the $20,133 average cost to educate each of them. The District member town’s taxpayers are subsidizing the cost to educate the non-District pupils. The total calculated premium/subsidy for FY18 is $5.1 million split as $4.7 million due to the Choice subsidy and $0.4 million due to the Tuition subsidy. Importantly, this analysis assumes that the NRSD could educate just its own 1,022 students at its average $20,133 Expenditure per Pupil. This seems plausible given that the Top 25 and Top 50 ranked high schools in MA have a median Total Expenditure per Pupil of about $17,000 (including out-of-district expenses, so their in-district median would be even less), and the adjacent Monomoy School District In- District Expenditure per Pupil was $18,520. According to this analysis, the cost of these subsidies for the median Brewster household currently assessed at $461,500 was about $267 for FY18. The analysis then addresses three hypothetical questions important to the taxpayers, each assuming that the savings generated by eliminating only the Choice subsidy could be used to support a bond payment of the same amount over varying terms. Eliminating the Choice subsidy assumes ending participation in Choice – which is under the direct control of the NRSC. Note: the answer to each question assumes the savings from eliminating only the Choice subsidy (and not the Tuition subsidy) would be applied to a payment on a 25-year, level payment bond with an interest rate of 2.25% (1) How large of a school bond could be raised using the savings from the elimination of the above subsidies (without raising taxes on the district at all)? Answer: $89.6 million (2) Assuming a smaller school would then be built for $126 million with $0 MSBA state assistance, how large of a bond would the district need (supported by new taxes) as compared the current NRSD project bonding/tax ask of $95+ million. Answer: $36.4 million (3) Freed-up bonding capacity for Brewster, Orleans, Eastham, Wellfleet that could be used to support other town priorities without raising taxes beyond current NRSD project (Brewster is about 1/2) Answer: $58.8 million The analysis finishes with the following statement: Bottom line - by eliminating the Choice subsidy, even assuming no MSBA state funding, Brewster taxpayers would support a new, smaller Nauset Regional High School and would still have $20-$30+ million of bonding flexibility to support, for example, a Brewster Ladies Library renovation, a Community Center, or Cape Cod Sea Camps project without raising taxes beyond what the NRSD is currently asking the taxpayers to support for the larger proposed NRHS project. Source FY18 DESE EOYR18 Total In-District XP 29,551,080$ Only considered In-District expenses because Out-of-District expenses not affected by Choice/Tuition students DESE EOYR18/Line 630 Choice Reimbursement 1,744,600$ 5,983$ 5,028$ DESE EOYR18/Line 630 Choice SPED Reimbursement 331,611$ 956$ DESE EOYR18/Line 40 Tuition from Other Dist (Reg Day)1,515,227$ 16,291$ 14,030$ DESE EOYR18/Line 40 Tuition from Other Dist (SPED)244,210$ 2,261$ Member Town's In-District XPs 25,715,432$ a Represents the total expenses that need to be covered by the member towns for its students through taxes, aid and grants Does not offset expenses with revenue from other aid/grants because assume would be the same without Choice/Tuition students Member Towns' Enrollment 10/1/17 (FY18)NRHS 603 NRMS 419 1,022 b Choice Enrollment 10/1/17 (FY18)NRHS 236 NRMS 111 347 c *District 10/1/17 (FY18) Official Enrollment Data sheet shows 340 Choice, but this misses 7 P-Town NRMS Choice pupils Tuition Enrollment 10/1/17 (FY18)NRHS 85 NRMS 23 *Only Truro 7th & 8th grades tuition into NRMS; Choice is the reported 89 + 15 Truro 6th graders + 7 P-Town pupils 108 d 25,162$ e = a/b Member Towns' Taxpayers In-District expense/Member Towns' pupil in NRMS/NRHS (reflects burden of subsidies for Choice/Tuition) 20,133$ f DESE reported In-District expense/pupil 5,029$ g = e-f Subsidy burden/Member Town pupil 5,139,506$ h = b*g Total Annual Subsidy burden for Member Towns due to Choice/Tuition 414,927$ i = d * f - tuition paid Annual Subsidy burden due to Tuition - Truro/P-Town 4,724,579$ j = h-i Annual Subsidy burden due to Choice *Assumes NRSD can educate its 1,022 pupils at same $20,133 In-District expense/pupil *Median expense/pupil for MA Top 25/50 high schools is about $17k (Total expense/pupil, not just In-District), so seems probable What is the annual tax cost of the subsidy burden to the Brewster taxpayer with the town's median value home of $461,500 (assuming Brewster is 48% of NRSD)?4254853730 Brewster total assessed value Annual tax cost for the Total Annual Subsidy burden due to Choice/Tuition 267.58$ 461500 Median Assessed Value Annual tax cost for the Total Annual Subsidy burden due to Tuition - Truro/P-Town 21.60$ 0.00010846 Tax cost multiplier Annual tax cost for the Total Annual Subsidy burden due to Choice 245.98$ 48%Brewster Nauset assessment % Total Subsidy Choice Subsidy 20 year term, level payments, 2% interest rate 84,038,290$ $77,253,639 25 year term, level payments, 2.25% interest rate 97,457,279$ $89,589,275 30 year term, level payments, 2.5% interest rate 107,571,364$ $98,886,821 Assuming a smaller school would then be built for $126 million with $0 MSBA assistance, how large of a bond would the district need (supported by new taxes) as compared the current NRSD project bonding/tax ask of $95+ million. Net cost of new, smaller school 126,000,000$ Total Subsidy Choice Subsidy 20 year term, level payments, 2% interest rate 41,961,710$ 48,746,361$ 25 year term, level payments, 2.25% interest rate 28,542,721$ 36,410,725$ 30 year term, level payments, 2.5% interest rate 18,428,636$ 27,113,179$ Freed-up bonding capacity for Brewster, Orleans, Eastham, Wellfleet that could be used to support other town priorities without raising taxes beyond current NRSD project (Brewster is about 1/2) Current NRSD bonding/tax ask 95,200,000$ Total Subsidy Choice Subsidy 20 year term, level payments, 2% interest rate 53,238,290$ 46,453,639$ 25 year term, level payments, 2.25% interest rate 66,657,279$ 58,789,275$ 30 year term, level payments, 2.5% interest rate 76,771,364$ 68,086,821$ APPENDIX 3A Bottom line - by eliminating the Choice subsidy, even assuming no MSBA state funding, Brewster taxpayers would support a new, smaller Nauset Regional High School and would still have $20-$30+ million of bonding flexibility to support, for example, a Brewster Ladies Library renovation, a Community Center, or Cape Cod Sea Camps project without raising taxes beyond what the NRSD is currently asking the taxpayers to support for the larger proposed NRHS project 1,759,437$ 2,076,211$ Total Choice Reimbursement Total Tuition from Truro/P-Town How large of a school bond could be raised using the savings from the elimination of the above subsidies (without raising taxes on the district at all)? Source FY19 DESE EOYR19 Total In-District XP 30,239,017$ Only considered In-District expenses because Out-of-District expenses not affected by Choice/Tuition students DESE EOYR19/Line 630 Choice Reimbursement 1,573,550$ 5,877$ 4,948$ DESE EOYR19/Line 630 Choice SPED Reimbursement 295,236$ 928$ DESE EOYR19/Line 40 Tuition from Other Dist (Reg Day)1,975,644$ 18,964$ 16,062$ DESE EOYR19/Line 40 Tuition from Other Dist (SPED)356,875$ 2,901$ Member Town's In-District XPs 26,037,712$ a Represents the total expenses that need to be covered by the member towns for its students through taxes, aid and grants Does not offset expenses with revenue from other aid/grants because assume would be the same without Choice/Tuition students Member Towns' Enrollment 10/1/18 (FY19)NRHS 624 NRMS 445 1,069 b Choice Enrollment 10/1/18 (FY19)NRHS 228 NRMS 90 318 c Tuition Enrollment 10/1/18 (FY19)NRHS 92 NRMS 31 *Only Truro 7th & 8th grades tuition into NRMS 123 d 24,357$ e = a/b Member Towns' Taxpayers In-District expense/Member Towns' pupil in NRMS/NRHS (reflects burden of subsidies for Choice/Tuition) 20,239$ f DESE reported In-District expense/pupil 4,118$ g = e-f Subsidy burden/Member Town pupil 4,402,221$ h = b*g Total Annual Subsidy burden for Member Towns due to Choice/Tuition 156,878$ i = d * f - tuition paid Annual Subsidy burden due to Tuition - Truro/P-Town 4,245,343$ j = h-i Annual Subsidy burden due to Choice *Assumes NRSD can educate its 1,069 pupils at same $20,239 In-District expense/pupil *Median expense/pupil for MA Top 25/50 high schools is about $17k (Total expense/pupil, not just In-District), so seems probable What is the annual tax cost of the subsidy burden to the Brewster taxpayer with the town's median value home of $461,500 (assuming Brewster is 48% of NRSD)?4254853730 Brewster total assessed value Annual tax cost for the Total Annual Subsidy burden due to Choice/Tuition 229.19$ 461500 Median Assessed Value Annual tax cost for the Total Annual Subsidy burden due to Tuition - Truro/P-Town 8.17$ 0.00010846 Tax cost multiplier Annual tax cost for the Total Annual Subsidy burden due to Choice 221.02$ 48%Brewster Nauset assessment % Total Subsidy Choice Subsidy 20 year term, level payments, 2% interest rate 71,982,623$ $69,417,443 25 year term, level payments, 2.25% interest rate 83,476,599$ $80,501,818 30 year term, level payments, 2.5% interest rate 92,139,774$ $88,856,271 Assuming a smaller school would then be built for $126 million with $0 MSBA assistance, how large of a bond would the district need (supported by new taxes) as compared the current NRSD project bonding/tax ask of $95+ million. Net cost of new, smaller school 126,000,000$ Total Subsidy Choice Subsidy 20 year term, level payments, 2% interest rate 54,017,377$ 56,582,557$ 25 year term, level payments, 2.25% interest rate 42,523,401$ 45,498,182$ 30 year term, level payments, 2.5% interest rate 33,860,226$ 37,143,729$ Freed-up bonding capacity for Brewster, Orleans, Eastham, Wellfleet that could be used to support other town priorities without raising taxes beyond current NRSD project (Brewster is about 1/2) Current NRSD bonding/tax ask 95,200,000$ Total Subsidy Choice Subsidy 20 year term, level payments, 2% interest rate 41,182,623$ 38,617,443$ 25 year term, level payments, 2.25% interest rate 52,676,599$ 49,701,818$ 30 year term, level payments, 2.5% interest rate 61,339,774$ 58,056,271$ APPENDIX 3A Bottom line - by eliminating the Choice subsidy, even assuming no MSBA state funding, Brewster taxpayers would support a new, smaller Nauset Regional High School and would still have $15-$25+ million of bonding flexibility to support, for example, a Brewster Ladies Library renovation, a Community Center, or Cape Cod Sea Camps project without raising taxes beyond what the NRSD is currently asking the taxpayers to support for the larger proposed NRHS project 1,868,786$ Total Choice Reimbursement 2,332,519$ Total Tuition from Truro/P-Town How large of a school bond could be raised using the savings from the elimination of the above subsidies (without raising taxes on the district at all)? Rank Enrollment Region Per Pupil XP 1 Boston Latin School 1656 $19,609 from Schooldigger.com Top 25 Top 50 2 Sturgis Charter 816 $14,713 500 or less 4 16%12 24% 3 Hopkinton 1153 $15,016 501-750 4 16%6 12% 4 Advanced Math & Science Charter532 $15,125 751-1000 4 16%12 24% 5 Dover-Sherborn 665 $20,970 1001-1500 7 28%11 22% 6 Mystic Valley 365 $12,866 >1500 6 24%9 18% 7 Lexington 2212 $18,747 25 50 8 Weston 693 $25,367 9 Belmont 1294 $14,246 Median $ $17,389 Median $ $16,872 10 John O’Bryant Math & Science 1223 $19,948 from Schooldigger.com Median Enroll 1079 Median Enroll 881 11 Lynnfield 648 $15,888 12 Boston Latin Academy 1224 $19,817 from Schooldigger.com Average $ $17,521 $17,161 13 Manchester Essex 443 $18,343 Ave Enroll 1098 961 14 Medfield 828 $15,889 15 Westford Academy 1711 $14,806 not sure if this is academy or district 16 Berkshire Arts & Tech 151 $17,389 17 Bromfield School 402 $19,655 from Schooldigger.com Nauset vs.Top 25 Nauset vs.Top 50 18 Acton-Boxborough 1827 $15,697 Median $119%Median $123% 19 Sharon 1079 $16,892 Average $118%Average $121% 20 Newton South 1892 $19,395 all Newton district Just 3 districts in Top 50 have higher Cost/pupil 21 Winchester 1351 $14,121 22 Westwood 999 $18,310 FY21 9-12 Enrollment 23 Arlington 1325 $14,594 XP/Pupil 24 Nauset 907 $20,710 Ptown $30,903 25 Brookline 2043 $19,921 Truro $31,460 26 Wayland 855 $18,750 Wellfleet $29,143 27 Groton Dunstable 784 $15,606 Eastham $24,827 28 Wellesley 1569 $20,380 Orleans $22,559 29 Boston Collegiate Charter 313 $19,307 Brewster $20,168 30 Hamilton-Wenham 560 $18,362 Nauset $20,710 855 31 Duxbury 1053 $15,288 Monomoy $17,503 496 32 Lenox Memorial 245 $19,476 D-Y $15,777 652 33 Westborough 1131 $15,838 Barnstable $15,762 1,390 34 Needham 1686 $18,148 Falmouth $18,630 811 35 Ashland 769 $14,469 Sandwich $17,460 641 36 Nashoba 976 $16,589 Bourne $15,782 428 37 Cohasset 469 $16,953 Mashpee $17,643 442 38 Pioneer Charter Science 2 203 $14,353 Cape Tech $26,693 626 39 Foxborough Charter 280 $12,519 Upper Cape Tech $21,359 722 40 Pioneer Charter Science 198 $14,409 41 Concord Carlisle 1273 $22,471 42 Scituate 921 $15,995 43 Abby Kelley Foster Charter 364 $14,094 44 Newton North 2121 $19,395 all Newton district 45 KIPP Lynn 483 $18,286 46 Newburyport 766 $16,851 47 Longmeadow 957 $15,263 48 Tantasqua 720 $14,419 49 Masconomet 1143 $18,654 50 Holliston 794 $14,146 Cape School Districts *Highlighting indicates 750 or fewer students APPENDIX 4 Nauset Believes … Every Child Matters Nauset Public Schools 78 Eldredge Park Way, Orleans MA 02653 Phone: 508-255-8800 ● Fax: 508-240-2351 ● http://nausetschools.org Thomas M. Conrad Superintendent of Schools Keith E. Gauley Mary E. Buchanan Assistant Superintendent Director of Student Services Giovanna Venditti Eileen Belastock Director of Finance & Operations Director of Technology Massachusetts Inter-district School Choice Program The Massachusetts School Choice program was established in 1991 (MGL c 76 sect 128). The Nauset Regional School District began participating in the the Choice program in 1997, at which time Nauset had 5.5 FTE students coming in through the Choice program and 13.8 FTE students leaving the District through Choice. School Choice Tuition Revenues (Edited from the DESE Web Site) – 1-15-2021 While the School Choice Statute does not provide explicit guidance as to the allowable uses of choice tuition revenue, the requirement that municipalities place such revenues in a special account for use by the school committee indicated a legislative intent that they be used for the general purposes of the school choice program. School choice tuition is intended to cover any additional out of pocket expenses associated with students who are enrolled under the choice program and to provide a financial incentive to encourage districts to participate in the program. Therefore, allowable expenditures include any expenditure for staff, materials, equipment, or services that directly enhance the quality of a district’s educational program and benefit students who currently attend a district’s schools. Local school committees may not transfer funds for the payment of debt service, even if the debts were incurred by the municipality for a school related capital expenditure, as such expenditures are not within the scope of the school committee’s power or authority. Under the Current Chapter 70 formula, the pupils at a receiving district are credited toward the sending district’s foundation enrollment. However, any low-income increments for those pupils are credited to the receiving districts’ foundation budgets. Why School Choice works for the Nauset Regional Schools Nauset, along with all other Cape high schools, continues to participate in School Choice because of the significant advantages it brings to our member towns and their school-aged children, namely: • Positive income stream • Additional income contributes to a wide variety of courses that deepen and broaden the school curriculum, enriching the educational experience for all students • Increases the diversity of the Nauset student body by bringing in students from more diverse backgrounds and cultures. Nauset Believes … Every Child Matters School Choice provides a very significant revenue stream (1.74 million in FY20) that not only enables Nauset Middle School and Nauset High School to offer an extensive program of studies, but the funds also allow the District to reduce assessments (taxes) to the member towns. How is this possible when the base tuition rate is only $5,000? It has to do with the distribution of the students into our classrooms. To understand how the school choice tuition benefits Nauset financially, even at $5,000 per student, we identified the home towns of each student enrolled and matched that with the courses they are enrolled in. We have attached a summary of this data collected for all of our English classes at the high school as of October 2020. The data show that on average there are 10.3 students per course from one of the four member towns or from Truro or Provincetown and 2.97 students from other towns attending under School Choice. The percentage of school choice students in each course varies from 0% to 47%. The average % of Choice students in all of our English classes in October 2020 was 22%. In most cases, the additional cost to educate a School Choice student is limited to the cost of any consumable supplies. In the example of our English classes, the District is already paying for the salary of the teacher, the heat and electricity costs, and general operating costs of the 10.3 students per class who attend from the member towns. So there is little added expense to add an average of about 3 School Choice students to each English class at Nauset High School. There are of course some situations where we have added a teacher to accommodate the School Choice students and keep class size reasonable for students from our member towns. For the 2020- 2021 school year, we estimate that about 6-7 teachers teaching 4-5 course sections each are needed to accommodate the 198 students who attend Nauset High under School Choice and keep class sizes for all students at a reasonable level. The cost for these teachers is approximately. $644,085 based on 6.5 teachers @$84,750 each (Nauset’s average teacher salary per DESE FY18) plus the cost of fringe benefits (health and life insurance). With expected revenue from School Choice in FY20 to be $1,735,199 & FY21 to be $1,549,403 the School Choice program is clearly financially beneficial to our District. Why are some of the High School classes so small? When you review the data on enrollment in our English classes, you will notice that some classes are very small. The reasons for this vary. In some cases the course is a special education inclusion class where enrollment is purposefully kept small. In some cases, a small group of students needed to take a course but a new section had to be added to accommodate their schedule of other classes. Still other classes are small because a few students needed to take a required class to matriculate into the next grade or in order to accumulate enough credits to graduate. Our goal is to meet the needs of each and every students in the most effective way possible. Why else is School Choice beneficial to Nauset students? Beyond financial benefits, there are at least two other major benefits to the School Choice program in Nauset – the positive impact on the Program of Studies – the courses we can offer - and the addition of students from diverse backgrounds, race and cultures. Again, when we reviewed our core classes in English, we found that very few of the classes would not run even if there were no school choice students enrolled at Nauset High. On the other hand, Nauset students – from member towns and from School Choice – can take a wide variety of courses Nauset Believes … Every Child Matters that we would likely not be able to afford to offer without the additional revenue from School Choice. Some of these courses include: Advanced Placement Art, American Sign Language, Level 4 German, Latin 2, Criminology, Botany, Salt Water Ecosystems, American Pop Culture, and even some sections of Advanced Placement Calculus or AP Statistics to name a few. These courses not only attract students to Nauset from all over Cape Cod, but they provide an unmatched opportunity for member students to challenge themselves and pursue their individual interests and passions. In addition, the School Choice students also expose our member students to more diverse backgrounds, cultures and races. The Outer Cape can be a very isolating place, and some students do not have numerous opportunities to venture off Cape. So the addition of 198 students with different backgrounds and experiences enriches all of our students in a way that may not be possible without participation in School Choice. In Conclusion School Choice makes sense for Nauset financially and educationally. We intend to continue to market our Regional Schools throughout the Cape as an outstanding opportunity for students to attend one of the best high schools in Massachusetts. Nauset Public Schools February 1, 2021 Campus View 60% of the existing campus buildings are retained to preserve the school character. The new additions satisfy program needs while respecting the natural surroundings. NausetRegional High School sits on 14 acres inside the Cape Cod National Seashore, the only school on the East coast to be located in a national park. This pristine setting is the home to 900 students from diverse socio- economic and cultural backgrounds. While striving to bring the students together in a dynamic and inclusive community, Nauset also recognizes the need to see each student as an individual with his/her unique needs, talents, and ambitions. Thus Nauset off ers a deep and broad curriculum with multiple pathways to graduation, which allows each student to choose a path that is right for them. All paths share a common foundation and are built on widely -recognized global competencies - character, citizenship, creativity, critical thinking, collaboration, and communication. Nauset believes … every child matters 1 VOTE - March 30 Given the uncertainties of life in a pandemic world and the need to avoid further delays in the high school building project, the Nauset Regional School Committee voted to hold a district-wide election as allowed under MGL Chapter 71, section 16(n). The vote is set for Tuesday, March 30. How to Vote There will be three options for voting: in person on March 30, by absentee ballot, or by (early- voting) mail-in ballot. There will be no early in-person voting. Registered voters will receive a postcard from their Town Clerk notifying them of the voting options and procedures. Where to Vote In-person voting will take place on March 30 between the hours of 11:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. at the following locations: Brewster - Brewster Baptist Church Eastham - Eastham Town Hall Orleans - Orleans Senior Center Wellfleet - Wellfleet Senior Center NAUSET NEWS Nauset Regional High School Building Project Nauset Public Schools February 1, 2021 The Problem The problems presented by the almost 50-year old Nauset Regional High School campus center around two main issues - the physical state of the infrastructure and the limitations and inadequacies of the educational spaces. While the buildings have been maintained over the years, the building systems (e.g. boiler, water heater, etc.) are original and have passed their “use by” date. Many of the systems are not up to code, they are costly to run and maintain, not environmentally friendly, and not all areas meet ADA requirements. If you were not able to join one of the high school campus tours that were held in the pre- COVID era, you can click Tour of the High School to take a tour of the campus and see what some of the issues are. The Solution The proposed remodel/expansion is the result of a nine-year effort. After commissioning a building assessment in 2012, discussions were held with Town officials and forums were held with the public to identify the requisites and priorities of the project going forward. In both 2015 and 2016 Nauset applied to the Massachusetts Building Authority (MSBA) for State funding. The 2016 application was approved and in Feb. 2017 MSBA issued an invitation to Nauset to become a part of its program. Also in 2017 Town voters authorized $1.3 million for a feasibility study and the actual design process began. After reviewing 11 options, the Nauset Regional School Committee selected the option that was 1) most cost effective (with a $36.6 million MSBA grant) and 2) provided the requisite educational space and environment. For more information see NRHS_Phasing and MSBA. Nauset believes … every child matters 2 Links for more information 1) Complete information on the Nauset High School building project can be found on the project website: nausetbuildingproject.com 2) Lower Cape News reports extensively on education topics https://www.lowercapenews.org/ reporting-education. Recents reports include: •Special Nauset Election Decides NRHS Future which features a discussion of the voting decision by NRSC Chair Chris Easley. •Superintendent’s Spotlight: a discussion of the building project with Superintendent Tom Conrad and NRSC Chair Chris Easley 3) Meeting between NRSC representatives and the Orleans Finance Committee (includes a discussion of School Budgets as well as School Choice) http://videoplayer.telvue.com/ Upcoming events •Superintendent’s Spotlight airs weekly on Lower Cape TV •Feb 3- First Informational Zoom Meeting: Project History - 6:30 p.m. •Feb. 3: Superintendent Conrad & NRSC reps meet with Orleans Selectboard JOIN US for Informational Zoom Meetings Beginning on Wednesday, February 3, the Nauset District Administration, Regional High School Building Committee and Regional School Committee, will hold a series of weekly forums designed to inform the citizens of our member towns on the many aspects of the proposed high school building project. The forums will be held via Zoom and each week will focus on a different aspect of the project. A presentation by participating panelists will be followed by a Q&A session based on questions submitted by viewers during the Zoom meeting. https://zoom.us/j/91924602088 US: +1 929 205 6099 Webinar ID: 919 2460 2088 www.NausetBuildingProject.com The NauseT RegioNal high school PRojecT Improved Building Security while preserving existing campus and landscape. Health & Wellness focus through improved air quality, low-energy smart lighting that is sustainable and designed to reduce environmental impacts. Energy Efficient upgrades for heating and hot water and increased insulation in walls and roofs throughout the renovated buildings and new spaces. New Technology access and capacity that align with the delivery of modern education. Renovated / Resized Classrooms and eight science labs that are designed to meet state requirements and enhance student learning, creativity, and innovation. Improved Public Access to newly located Auditorium, Fine Arts Building, Cafeteria, Music & Performing Arts, and Gymnasium. Community Opportunities beyond the school day, such as: Adult Education, year-round arts & cultural programming, health & fitness programs. The Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA) partnered with the Nauset Regional School District to support the design and construction of this renovation/reconfiguration project to provide facilities that meet current building and accessibility codes to support the needs of students and educators. The Plan A 50-year-old building with aging building systems that need ongoing repairs and upgrades to provide an appropriate, safe, and healthy educational environment that meets state guidelines and requirements. Favorable bidding climate which may provide more options to select the best companies to partner with on the project along with a lower construction cost. Historically low interest rates that would lower borrowing costs and save taxpayer dollars. Why Now? Renovate Existing Buildings along with new spaces designed to meet today’s educational requirements to best serve the students for the next 50 years. Provide temporary classrooms on site to ensure uninterrupted student learning and school operations during the construction phase. Take advantage of the $36.6 million MSBA grant in a fiscally responsible manner to provide an updated school facility that will serve current and future generations. The Proposal DISTRICT-WIDE VOTE: Tuesday March 30, 2021 Hours: 11:00 AM - 7:00 PM Ballot by mail: registered voters will receive instructions by mail from your respective Town Clerk a YES vote Approval for debt-exclusion funding is passed. Design and Bid Phase April 2021 - January 2022 Construction Phase February 2022 - July 2024 Completion of Project August 2024 Voting Information a NO vote Without majority approval, the MSBA funding of $36,661,305 reverts back to the state. VOTER REGISTRATION DEADLINES, POLLING LOCATIONS, and other voter information can be obtained by contacting your Town: www.brewster-ma.gov www.eastham-ma.gov/ www.town.orleans.ma.us/ www.wellfleet-ma.gov/ Tax Impact Estimates * 2.46% Interest Rate, based on 25-year Level Principal bond, subject to change. Tax impact calculations based on individual town property tax rates. First year bill/tax impact FY2024. Questions? Email the School Building Committee: nausetbuildingproject@nausetschools.org The Finances Brewster First Year $76.59 per $100,000 assessed property value Example: $400,000 Property Value $76.59 x 4 = $306.35 Eastham First Year $42.66 per $100,000 assessed property value Example: $400,000 Property Value $42.66 x 4 = $170.64 Orleans First Year $30.99 per $100,000 assessed property value Example: $400,000 Property Value $30.99 x 4 = $123.98 Wellfleet First Year $35.51 per $100,000 assessed property value Example: $400,000 Property Value $35.51 x 4 = $142.05 Total Project Cost:$131,825,665 Anticipated MSBA Grant: - $ 36,661,305 Nauset School District:$ 95,164,360 FYI ITEMS (MAIL) February 8, 2021 1. Form 500 – Comcast 2. Quarterly Reporting – Elder Services 3. Affordable Home Flyer - Habitat for Humanity 4. Housing Choice Act 2020 Update – KP Law 5. Disclosure Notice – NextEra Energy 6. 62 Citizen Letters re: Millstone Road 617.556.0007 | 1.800.548.3522 | www.k-plaw.com | ©2020 KP Law, P.C. Housing Choice Act of 2020 Update February 1, 2021 On January 14, 2021, Governor Charlie Baker signed into law House Bill 5250 – “An Act Enabling Partnerships of Growth”, the so-called “Housing Choice Law”. The stated purpose of this legislation is to: “finance improvements to the commonwealth’s economic infrastructure and promote economic opportunity.” To that end, the legislation includes more than $682,000,000 in capital authorizations. However, the Act also makes a number of substantial changes to housing and development statutes, including G.L. c.40R (Smart Growth Districts), G.L. c.40V (Housing Development Initiative Programs) and G.L. c.40A (the Zoning Act). The purpose of this Memorandum is to alert you to several important amendments to G.L. c.40A that took effect immediately upon the signing of the bill into law. Future updates will address other important provisions of the new legislation. Among the important changes to the Zoning Act are: (1) amendments to Section 5 reducing from 2/3 to simple majority the quantum of vote required for the legislative body to approve specified categories of local zoning; (2) amendments to Section 9 reducing the quantum of vote required for issuance of specified categories of special permits; (3) the addition of a new Section 3A that mandates “as of right” multi-family housing districts in communities serviced by public transportation; and (4) the insertion in Section 1A of several new definitions. We have addressed these changes below, in turn. As you will see, there may be value in reviewing existing zoning bylaws or ordinances to determine whether amendments will need to be made to address these revisions to state law. Quantum of Vote Requirements Lowered for Certain Zoning Amendments As of January 14, 2021, only a majority vote of the legislative body is required to enact the following types of local zoning: 1. A by-law or ordinance to allow any of the following as of right: a. Multifamily housing or mixed-use development in an eligible location; b. Accessory dwelling units, whether within the principal dwelling or a detached structure on the same lot; or c. Open-space residential developments. 2. A by-law or ordinance to allow by special permit: a. Multi-family housing or mixed-use development in an eligible location; b. An increase in the permissible density of population or intensity of a particular use in a proposed multi-family or mixed use development; 617.556.0007 | 1.800.548.3522 | www.k-plaw.com | ©2021 KP Law, P.C. c. Accessory dwelling units in a detached structure on the same lot; or d. A diminution in the amount of parking required for residential or mixed-use development. 3. A by-law or ordinance that: a. Provides for Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) zoning or natural resource protection zoning where adoption of such zoning promotes concentration of development in areas the municipality deems “most appropriate” for such development but which will not result in a diminution in the maximum number of housing units that could be developed within the municipality; or b. Modifies zoning regulations beyond what would otherwise be permitted under the existing zoning with respect to bulk and height of structures, yard sizes, lot area, setbacks, open space, parking and building coverage requirements to allow for additional housing units. 4. The adoption of a “smart growth” or “starter home” zoning district in accordance with G.L. c.40R, §3, subject to specific requirements. For cities and towns with councils of fewer than 25 members, the new law creates a process to increase the quantum of vote to 2/3. If the owners of 80% or more of the land area included in the zoning change, extending 300 feet therefrom, file a written protest prior to final action, then a 2/3 vote will be required to enact that particular change. Finally, as will be addressed in more detail below, the Act amends G.L. c.40A, §1A to define the categories of zoning amendments requiring only a majority vote, including: “accessory dwelling unit”; “as of right”; “open space development”; “multi-family housing”; “mixed-use development”; “eligible location”; and “lot”. Quantum of Vote Reduced for Certain Special Permits Also immediately effective are amendments to the special permit provisions of G.L. c.40A, § 9, reducing the quantum of vote required for the grant of specified types of special permits. Specifically, instead of requiring approval by a supermajority vote of all of the members of the special permit granting authority, only a simple majority vote is now required to grant a special permit allowing any of the following: 1. Multifamily housing located within 1/2 mile of a commuter rail station, subway station, ferry terminal or bus station; provided, that not less than 10 per cent of the housing shall be affordable to and occupied by households whose annual income is less than 80% of the area-wide median income as determined by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development and affordability is assured for a period of not less than 30 years through the use of an affordable housing restriction; 2. Mixed-use development in centers of commercial activity within a municipality, including town and city centers, other commercial districts in cities and towns and rural village districts; provided, that not less than 10% of the housing shall be affordable to and occupied by households whose annual income is less than 80% of the area-wide median income as determined by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development and affordability is assured for a period of not less than 30 years through the use of an affordable housing restriction; or 617.556.0007 | 1.800.548.3522 | www.k-plaw.com | ©2021 KP Law, P.C. 3. A reduced parking space to residential unit ratio requirement; provided, that a reduction in the parking requirement will result in the production of additional housing units. As noted above, the terms “multifamily housing” and “mixed-use development” are now defined terms in G.L. c.40A, §1A. New Zoning Requirements for “MBTA Communities” The new Housing Choice Law amends the Zoning Act, G.L. c.40A, by inserting a new section 3A. Chapter40A, §3A requires each “MBTA Community” to “have a zoning ordinance or by-law that provides for at least 1 district of reasonable size in which multi-family housing is permitted as of right . . . .” An MBTA Community is now broadly defined in G.L. c.40A, §1A. A preliminary list of the MBTA Communities subject to the application of this law appears at the end of this document. General Laws c.40A, § 3A mandates that a multi-family housing zoning district must exist in each MBTA Community and that (1) such zoning district shall not be subject to age restrictions and must be suitable for families with children; (2) such zoning district shall have a minimum gross density of at least 15 units per acre; and (3), if applicable, that such district be located not more than ½ mile from a commuter rail station, subway station, ferry terminal, or bus station. Section 3A also creates a penalty for failure to ensure the existence or creation of such a district. MBTA Communities that fail to create a zoning district in which multi-family housing is permitted as of right will be ineligible for funds from the Housing Choice Initiative Program, the Local Capital Projects Fund, and the MassWorks Infrastructure Program. The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority and the Massachusetts Department of Transportation are charged with promulgating guidelines to determine if an MBTA Community is in compliance with this new section. When additional information is available concerning these regulations, we will update you. Certain Zoning Terms Expressly Defined Several of the amendments to G.L. c.40A introduced by this new legislation employ terms that were previously undefined. Now, the following 10 terms are specifically defined in G.L. c.40A, §1A:  Accessory dwelling unit;  As of right;  Eligible locations;  Gross density;  Lot;  MBTA community;  Mixed-use development;  Multi-family housing;  Natural resource protection zoning; and  Open space residential development. 617.556.0007 | 1.800.548.3522 | www.k-plaw.com | ©2021 KP Law, P.C. Also of note, the new legislation replaces the definition of “Transfer of development rights” in G.L. c.40A, §1A, and substitutes the term “open space residential” for the word “cluster” in G.L. c.40A, § 9. Conclusion The above summary is intended to highlight the changes to the Zoning Act that have the most immediate and consequential impacts on the Commonwealth’s cities and towns. Notably, many of the terms now defined in G.L. c.40A, §1A have long been used and variously defined in local zoning by-laws and ordinances. While amendments to municipal zoning definitions may not be necessary immediately, municipalities should anticipate that differences between the new definitions in G.L. c.40A and those already employed in municipal zoning by- laws and ordinances may eventually lead to problems. This may be particularly important when determining the applicable quantum of vote requirements for certain zoning changes and special permits. For that reason, it will be useful to review the municipality’s current zoning bylaw or ordinance to determine if any immediate revisions are needed. In many towns, there may still be time to address these issues at the Annual or Special Town Meeting. Should you have any questions regarding these changes or any other aspects of the new legislation, please contact your KP Law Attorney. 617.556.0007 | 1.800.548.3522 | www.k-plaw.com | ©2021 KP Law, P.C. Preliminary List MBTA COMMUNITIES (G.L. c. 40A, § 3A) Abington Acton Amesbury Andover Arlington Ashburnham Ashby Ashland Attleboro Auburn Ayer Bedford Bellingham Belmont Berkley Beverly Billerica Boston Boxford Boxborough Braintree Bridgewater Brockton Brookline Burlington Cambridge Canton Carlisle Carver Chelmsford Chelsea Cohasset Concord Danvers Dedham Dover Dracut Duxbury East Bridgewater Easton Essex Everett Fitchburg Foxborough Framingham Franklin Freetown Georgetown Gloucester Grafton Groton Groveland Halifax Hamilton Hanover Hanson Harvard Haverhill Hingham Holbrook Holden Holliston Hopkinton Hull Ipswich Kingston Lakeville Lancaster Lawrence Leicester Leominster Lexington Lincoln Littleton Lowell Lunenburg Lynn Lynnfield Malden Manchester-by- the-Sea Mansfield Marblehead Marlborough Marshfield Maynard Medfield Medford Medway Melrose Merrimac Methuen Middleborough Millbury Middleton Millis Milton Nahant Natick Needham Newbury Newburyport Newton Norfolk North Andover North Attleborough North Reading Northborough Northbridge Norton Norwell Norwood Paxton Peabody Pembroke Plymouth Plympton Princeton Quincy Randolph Raynham Reading Rehoboth Revere Rochester Rockland Rockport Rowley Salem Salisbury Saugus Scituate Seekonk Sharon Sherborn Shirley Shrewsbury Somerville Southborough Sterling Stoneham Stoughton Stow Sudbury Sutton Swampscott Taunton Tewksbury Topsfield Townsend Tyngsborough Upton Wakefield Walpole Waltham Wareham Watertown Wayland Wellesley Wenham West Boylston West Bridgewater West Newbury Westborough Westford Westminster Weston Westwood Weymouth Whitman Wilmington Winchester Winthrop Woburn Worcester Wrentham *Please note that this list is preliminary, and not exhaustive. Communities may be subject to MBTA Community requirements as a result of special legislation. Disclaimer: This information is provided as a service by KP Law, P.C. This information is general in nature and does not, and is not intended to, constitute legal advice. Neither the provision nor receipt of this information creates an attorney-client relationship with KP Law, P.C. Whether to take any action based upon the information contained herein should be determined only after consultation with legal counsel.