Share This Article
The Sudbury Public Schools (SPS) School Committee held further discussions about the Combined Facility Department on Monday, November 25. The department is shared between SPS and the Town of Sudbury. It was established in 2012 by way of a memorandum of agreement (MOA) that aimed to increase efficiency and service delivery for both the Town and the schools. In recent months, SPS and the Town of Sudbury have held discussions to consider changes to the MOA, though the threat of SPS terminating the MOA has proven controversial.
Electrical Needs Remain Unclear
When the committee discussed the MOA on Monday, the focus was initially on the shared electrician and how much work SPS was getting relative to the percentage of the salary they were paying.
On September 9, Vice-Chair Meredith Gerson asked Don Sawyer, SPS Director of Business and Human Resources, if SPS was outsourcing electrical work, and he answered in the affirmative.
Gerson asked “Do we usually outsource electrical?”
Sawyer nodded and, though his voice was faint, appeared to say “In most cases.”
That led Gerson to conclude “So we’re paying twice for electrician.” (1:41:00)
On November 25, Vice-Chair Meredith Gerson again asked Sawyer about outsourcing electrical work, but received a different answer:
“That does not include all the electrical work, right? We’ve had to contract out, SPS has had to contract out to an external electrician?”
(1:36:20)
Sawyer responded “No.”
Superintendent Brad Crozier added:
“We contract out sometimes when there’s a, you know, like a capital project. That would be part of that capital project bid. And then we’ve also contracted out the emergency lighting and exit signs because that has to be done right at the beginning of the year so we can open schools. So we’ve gone with a company that can bring in a team and contract that out. But other than that we don’t routinely contract out electrical.”
Gerson followed up to ask if SPS ever had to contract out work because an electrical project couldn’t be completed in time by the combined facility department. Crozier responded: “I can follow up with a facilities person, but nothing comes to mind.”
Member Mary Stephens was not satisfied with the data provided, as it only listed the number of “jobs” performed by the electrician, and did not characterize the nature and scope of those jobs. The data was provided by Don Sawyer. Sawyer said he had the additional data and would provide it. (Page 65)
Capacity or Structure?
Vice-Chair Meredith Gerson emphasized that she felt the issue at hand was a capacity issue, and that the district’s facility work was more than a part-time facility director could handle. That aligned with what Superintendent Brad Crozier had said throughout the discussion.
Member Karyn Jones questioned the premise, noting that the list of capital projects was shorter than she expected.
Member Stephens pointed out that the largest projects, two upcoming school roof replacements, would be assigned a project manager through the Massachusetts School Building Authority. Superintendent Crozier responded that they would have more roof projects after the first two.
In prior conversations, Superintendent Crozier called the structure of the MOA into question. On September 9 he told the committee:
“So I did meet with [Town Manager Andy Sheehan]. We had a discussion. Part of the takeaway from that was to look at the MOA and look at what changes could be made to the MOA. After I did that and after I worked with school counsel on what changes could be made, the MOA, it’s the structure itself that I think is the barrier. So for me, and for the attorney, we thought that there was not a lot of changes that we could make to the MOA to really improve what SPS needs as far as support. We need the time and the MOA is kind of static on that.”
(1:12:30)
On Monday, he said the structure of the MOA was not the problem, and this was purely about their need for a full-time director:
“What I said in the meeting is what I said to you in the past. Was… I don’t think it’s the MOA necessarily that’s the problem. I think it’s capacity. That we need more capacity.”
(1:42:00)
Building a Case?
The committee ultimately wanted more information to substantiate the need for a full-time facility director. It will be on the administration to make the case to the committee. Member Mary Stephens argued that the committee should get input from a facilities expert about the director-level capacity needed to oversee the capital projects at SPS.
The committee had briefly heard the perspective of a facilities expert earlier in the evening, when Sandra Duran, the current Combined Facilities Director, spoke during the public comment period, but the committee did not invite her to join the discussion about her department. During her comment, Duran forcefully defended the work and professionalism of the Town electrician:
“He has performed his work with the utmost of professionalism, outstanding workmanship, and a great sense of humor.”
(51:30)
She also criticized the notion of outsourcing maintenance to contractors, and called into question the information provided in the meeting packet by the Director of Business and Human Resources, Don Sawyer:
“I would further that thought that it also boils down to good fiscal project management of said resources. Hiring outside contractors to do maintenance work is not a model that I believe proves to be cost effective over the long run. Particularly given the labor and procurement laws that govern our work.”
She continued:
“It would appear that the electrician resource summation in tonight’s meeting packet is lacking context regarding the scope of work, cost or effort needed to accomplish the various jobs. Additionally with respect to the facility condition analysis, what you have in your meeting package is an equipment list that depicts equipment, systems, age and conditions. The listing is not an analysis nor is it a capital plan. This equipment information will be used to create our 25 year capital plan. In your package tonight is a recommendation to eliminate the shared electrician position. This recommendation is made by the business manager, however, as a facility professional, and if I was consulted, which I have not been to-date, I would be utilizing our in-house help as much as possible to provide the same delivery of services at reasonable costs, and in keeping with all relevant codes, guidance and laws. In today’s packet you’ve been given a myopic view into the work that has been conducted by our electrician. That format does not speak to the projects, their complexity, the time required, materials, cost and it is not really representative of the work that has been conducted in the past, or plans for the future.”
Duran’s comment sought to broaden the discussion to evaluate the totality of the department and the efficiencies of shared services and in-house labor, while the administration focused their arguments on their perceived need for a full-time director for the schools.
While there was no clear consensus on how the committee and administration would correlate the upcoming capital projects to the number of hours needed from a facilities director, Member Mandy Sim at one point noted that Lincoln-Sudbury Regional High School has a full-time director for a single building, and that SPS has five school buildings. (1:54:20)
Even that comparison is fraught. Prior to joining the Town of Sudbury, Duran was the Director of Facilities at St. Mark’s School in Southborough. It has a 210-acre campus complete with sports facilities, boarding halls, faculty housing and educational facilities. As the operation scales, the organizational chart tends to expand, with the role of the director evolving into more strategic planning and oversight than hands-on execution of projects. For example, the City of Newton has one Facilities Director to oversee 78 buildings, including schools.
Duran emphasize this point in her public comment:
“As Superintendent Crozier stated in the September 9 SPS school committee meeting, it is the structure itself that is the barrier. I agree with Superintendent Crozier. It is the structure: the reporting structure and the accountability structure. Both of which have created the biggest challenges to creating and operating a successful shared services facility department.”
In a recent presentation of the financial condition of the Town, Town Manager Andy Sheehan highlighted the identified staffing needs. That list included an HVAC technician in the facilities department, and additional staff for the Fairbank Community Center. Adding an in-house HVAC technician is one example of an addition to the department organizational chart that could be targeted at the long list of HVAC equipment needs at SPS. (Page 61)
What Superintendent Crozier proposed on Monday was to hire a full-time facility director and contract out electrical work. Don Sawyer noted that they have a history of lumping together multiple HVAC units into one capital project, which was consistent with how Superintendent Crozier characterized the way SPS contracted their larger electrical needs. But the committee still didn’t have a means of evaluating the financial impacts of the different approaches. Sawyer agreed to provide some estimates for typical projects if they were to be done in-house versus contracted out.
On the Clock
Chair Nicole Burnard reminded the committee that a decision needs to be made by the end of the calendar year. The terms of the MOA set requirements for providing notice should either the Town or SPS wish to terminate the agreement.
This topic is not on the committee’s agenda for Monday, December 2, but they have five meetings slated for the month of December, as they work to build the budget for the next fiscal year. A final decision is expected in the weeks ahead, but it remains unclear upon what basis that decision will be made.
