 So this meeting is now being recorded. Eventually it will get uploaded to the town of Amherst YouTube channel. Everything that is said in this meeting will be part of the recording and I am promoting Councillor Cathy Shane as the host for this meeting. Recording in progress. Thank you everyone and have a great meeting. Thank you, Angela. Oh dear. No, I don't know why I would get an echo. Is the echo going? Yeah. Okay. Good afternoon everyone. This is the subcommittee of the net zero committee of the elementary school building committee. And I am the chair of the main committee, but I'm hoping I will quickly be able to turn over chair them to somebody else. And Jonathan Salmon has agreed to do it. But I just I want to call the meeting to order first. We're conducting it virtually. So I need to make sure that everyone who is here as a panelist, the subcommittee members who I will introduce as well as the panelists can see and be heard. The other thing I will be doing as the host once I move away from being chair is I'll be promoting some of the people who are in our audience because we have people who were the co-authors of our net zero bylaw who are architects interested within town so that we don't have them have to be in the public, but I'll ask them not to wait till we have a fuller discussion to join him. So I'm just going to go across the screen first calling on the subcommittee members to make sure they can see here and be heard. Jonathan. Good afternoon, Jonathan Salmon, committee member and also an architect and parent of a four or two Fort River School students. Great. Jonathan is also an architect for those who haven't met him before and not here in town. Rupert Roy Clark. Yes, I can hear you and see you. I am the facilities director and a member of the building committee. I'm hoping Ben Harrington will be joining us also. We have one other member of the building committee who has joined us. He isn't officially a member of the subcommittee, but we will always welcome him. Sean Magnano. I can hear everybody. Okay. What I think I'm going to do before I open it up for choosing a chair or asking Jonathan to take over chair, is just so quickly across all the other pictures I see. So you can introduce yourselves for people we haven't met before and so that the public who's on this can hear who you are. So I'll just do it as the names I see on the screen. So Vivian, you're my first on my top row. Thank you. Vivian Lowe with Dinesco Design, we're the architects of the project. Donna. Donna Dinesco with Dinesco Design. Happy to be here. Excited to be here. Donna, why don't you just call up the next person on your team and then, okay. Perfect. Tim Cooper, project manager with Dinesco and Colin. I'm calling on our fix with Dinesco. Then I think we have several of your consultants here too. We do. We'll start with Simone Oh. Simone Oh, I'm a mechanical engineer. Thank you. Then Vamshi. Vamshi Gujai with Tom City. We are ZNE and sustainable consultant. And along with Sonny. You and Sonny Johnny with certain Tom City where the ZNE and sustainability consultant. And then we have two members of the owners project management team, the answer team with us. Margaret and then Shelly. Hi, this is Margaret Wood. As Cathy says, I'm the owners project manager and representative on the project. Shelly and Shelly Potthorff. I'm an architect specializing in high performance buildings working with answer on the owner project. Rep side of things. Can we also introduce Nicole? Who's also with Nicole? Nicole, why don't you go ahead? Yeah, Nicole. Hi, everyone. I'm with Thornton Hema study with Vamshi and Sonny as well. And I'm a daylight specialist. Well, thank you all very much for joining us. You know, I would like to nominate Jonathan Salvin to be chair of this subcommittee and hopefully he will accept. And then I will turn sharing over him. And I think, Jonathan, you also agreed to do a brief pres review of what's in our net zero bylaw so that you for all the design team, everyone is on the same page. So do I hear a second for my nomination? Second. I second it. OK. And I think there are only Ben hasn't joined us. So three of the four of us are here, Jonathan. So I will call on Jonathan to vote first. I will vote for myself. OK, and I will vote for Jonathan and Rupert. I vote I and Ben, do you vote for Jonathan to chair the subcommittee? I vote I. Ben votes I. OK, I think he's joining us soon. OK, Ben is on his way in. OK, so Ben is. Yes. OK, great. So Ben Harrington will be joining us. OK, so Jonathan, I'm going to turn it over to you. And if it's OK with you to bring bring in some of the people that you can see in the participants, or do you want me to wait? I think you can you can bring them in. I unfortunately, I'm not sure that I can fully see them because as host, you can still see things that I can't. But but but I but I'm sure you you see folks that you like that. And so I think you can do that. We'll just ask that, you know, we we get going in this process and then OK, so you get going. And that what I'm going to ask is if I bring people in if you would just mute your mics and then wait till we open it up. But I want to make sure that everybody can see everyone who else is on. We have eleven additional people and maybe just let's see. I can allow to talk. I think I can promote promote the panelists. OK, Jonathan, you can go ahead while I'm doing this. It's a good afternoon. And I'm going to share my screen just so that we can have the text up here. And oh, boy, I have way too much on my screen. So hopefully I'm picking the right thing here. OK, can folks see this document on the screen? I can. OK. Yes. Great. So and I'm probably going to get my history a little wrong. But in approximately two thousand eighteen or two thousand nineteen that the town passed a zero net energy by law went through all the requirements for the Attorney General and it's been in place for a few years. And while we've had a couple of projects begin their process, this project will probably be the the fullest test of this new bylaw. And so I'm going to kind of walk through the requirements. There's a whole section of definitions before that, which we can return to if there are questions that people have. But for the purposes of kind of educating myself and the the other members of the of the committee and and members of the public that might be attending, we just kind of walk through the requirements. And I apologize if I'm a little hard to hear because the mask today, a little technology snafu when I wasn't able to secure a room where I could take this mask off. So what is this bylaw applied to? Well, it applies to all new town buildings and building additions. And I'm not going to read this word for word, but the intent is to design them to net zero energy capable. And implicit in that is to operate without fossil fuels, except for things like emergency generators, process energy, specialized equipment. The other thing that that may or may not be kind of amourst, unique is that the renewable energy is intended to be generated in association with the project, if possible, practical, I guess. In this bylaw applies all projects that are new buildings or additions over two million dollars, which clearly this project will be. You know, for projects that combine as we will explore as part of our our charge from the MSBA for projects to combine renovation and new addition, only the new addition piece for the purposes of this bylaw has to meet the requirements of the bylaw. Do I hear a question? No. For projects that this applies to, the. Unless I might actually read that. For all projects to which this bylaw applies, the town shall design a zero net energy capable project in compliance with this bylaw. If the costs of purchase and installation of the town owned new and independently measured renewable energy systems for the project exceed 10 percent, the net energy ready project costs. Minus, which are total project costs minus purchase installation costs of the renewable energy systems. If that is met, if that threshold is met, then the town shall. Proceed with net zero energy capable project and include in that design as much renewable energy renewable energy systems for the project as equals the 10 percent of the net energy ready project costs and plan to obtain any remaining energy capability capabilities capacities to meet the remaining needs by renewable energy as long as one. As long as the per kilowatt hour cost is less than comparable to the per kilowatt hour costs of utilities provided like utility provide electricity in the first year of the contract only in the last circumstance made the town purchase energy that is not specifically dedicated to the project. So that's a for me. This is a little bit of a dense section, but I think we can talk a little bit more about it in detail. Renewable energy systems not on the project site or not in the same electrical meter as the subject buildings or building additions may be used. If insufficient solar or wind exposure is available, isn't insufficient solar wind exposure is available on the project site. Renewable energy systems shall be dedicated exclusively to the project and the energy generated shall be measured independently. This is a kind of a key piece that the project and the renewable energy must be tied together. Now may sell the renewable energy credits. Compliance with the bylaw. How will the bylaw be kind of enforced or viewed? Certificate the certificate certification by the architect of record that the final design documents if followed will produce a completed project that is net zero energy cable, which to me translates that the architect of record has to state that they have met the bylaw. In addition to that, a peer review will be needed. A peer review confirming that in the opinion of a third party reviewer, the final construction documents if followed will produce a completed project that is net that is zero energy capable. Third, complete completed contracting, complete contracting for commissioning at a suitable point prior to occupancy and recommissioning at a point 12 months after occupancy. However, the failure to achieve the net zero requirement at the 12 month recommissioning shall not affect compliance with the bylaw. And four, compliance shall be measured by the project's site energy, not source energy. Okay. The last part of the bylaw is implementation. The town and the project and users shall undertake on a good faith basis to formulate a preliminary budget, energy budget for the project consistent with the zero energy requirements prior to schematic design. That's really the, to me, this is the part we're starting very soon with this meeting, really, but if in additional meetings as well. And to endeavor to operate the project in accordance with the final energy budget for the project consistent with the zero energy requirements. To report publicly, actually to report to the public annually, the energy performance of the project for 10 years from the date of occupancy. That's kind of where we're starting. And I think what I might like to first do is just ask the design team if they, they presumably all read it. You have some general questions that we can begin to assist you with on this. I certainly have a question about the definition of the renewable energy systems and what is included in the 10 percent and what is not, whether it's just the PV or source generation or as the wording would suggest, it's the systems that that's tied to and then what part of that system. So I'm sure there's some intent there, but I would just like to understand that a little better. Yeah. And I might actually like to now, Kathy, call on the knowledge and the historic wisdom of some of the folks who helped draft this. Or Jonathan, if you, if you take down this, I think. Yeah, I was sharing. Yeah. So people can see each other. So you can see who's here too. OK. So both Chris Riddle, Rudy Perkins, and Lynn Griezmer are all here. So I think you've got your author team. Indeed. And I also saw, I think Bruce's hand up for a second ago as well. So could you, Tim, repeat your question one more time and then we'll we'll dig into it a little bit. Sure. The 10 percent that is referred to in the law that. Beyond which you can enter in a PPA or something like that. We just want to know that 10 percent is defined as the cost of the renewable energy system. And if you read the definition of renewable energy system, it says mechanical or electric system connected to the PV. So it just a clarification on what that includes. Is it just the power generating systems or the systems that they connect to and service the building? It's just to let us understand, you know, what we're dealing with. So I'm going to try to scan around, see if I can see a hand raised. And for some of these, I may have simply have to take a note and. He's got his he's got his hand up. Yep. Rudy, can you unmute? Yeah. Can you hear me? Yeah, I hopefully we all have the same understanding of this. But I this came out of the discussion about the addition of the renewable energy. So and the cost test was connected to those systems like PV systems. So my take on this is that the definition of renewable energy systems just really means the renewable energy equipment and not all of the ventilation and, you know, peripheral building systems that would have been there in the first place. So hopefully everybody else, Lynn and and others and had that same understanding. Lynn has her hand up. First of all, let me just correct the record. I'm not an architect, even though I was on the committee to do this. And although I've been involved in building projects, I think that Rudy's interpretation is correct. But let me preface our discussion here by saying this is the first building we have our building based on this bylaw. And even though I was not one of the original architects, I was on the committee that did the rewrite on it along with Rudy. And I think I saw him earlier, Chris Riddle, who are here. And I think that one of the things that we will be as interested in as a town as you are as interested in as the committee and the architects is whether there are still pieces in this that may still be unworkable that we may have to look at more closely. And I think that that is a reasonable thing that we should all just kind of be keeping a notepad on the side that says are there places where we need to do further clarification with the bylaw or possible other modifications? But I just want to say it's exciting to be at this moment in Amherst's history. And we want to thank you all for diving into this bylaw and to this project in a way that I hope and I know will lead to a great elementary school. Thanks. Vivian, do you want to follow up on Tim's question? Yes. So thank you for clarifying that we're talking about the system that provides the renewable energy, right? So we're talking about PVs, canopy systems, potentially. So if we're looking at the cost of this equipment, we would be interested in determining whether it's the town's goal to actually purchase and own this equipment versus to contract because those are very different costs. And then there are also time requirements. And this also folds into the the lead certification and all that fun stuff. But I think if if you can clarify and talk a little bit about the goals, is it is it the intent that we purchase as part of this project? Rudy, you want to chime in? Sure. Yeah. The intent was that the project actually include the town owning, say the PV systems and incorporating that in the project. And there was a attached report at the time of this bylaw revision that sort of clarified that. But it's also in the definitions of the renewable energy capable versus renewable energy ready and the 10 percent test. So you build you basically build the PV unless it's going to cost more than 10 percent of the cost of the project without the PV. And in that case, and these other options come in. Is that does that help? Yes, thank you. Great. Other questions. Donna. Yeah, thank you. Just just to add on to that. And first of all, we are so excited to be part of this process with you. And we really look at this as a true partnership. And we're we're we're going to ask some questions up front to make sure we all fully understand and this conversation will obviously continue all the way through. But as far as the town owning the equipment, are there folks in town that we would work closely with to purchase and find the right solutions? How do you envision that working? We have as part of our team, Solar Design Associates, some of you may know them who would help facilitate how much solar we need, where they may go, where is the best location, et cetera, et cetera, that we will engage with. But as far as the actual procurement and understanding that whole process, is there someone in town to assist us? Thank you. That is a really good question. I'm going to hold. I don't personally know the answer to that. And I see a couple of their hands raised, but I am taking note as well. Chris Riddle. Would you like to unmute? I want my phone. I don't know how to use the phone. Hi, Chris Riddle of Q and Riddle Architects and one of the people that created this bylaw. I want to comment on one question that was asked a couple of questions ago, which was made reference to if you did ground-mounted solar and put it on a canopy over a parking lot, that's very likely, a very likely possibility. And I think that's I would say that that's a fairly I can't answer that based on the bylaw. We can't answer that. I can't answer that question. Maybe Rudy or Lynn could could. But I think that the question of the building a canopy over a parking lot does the cost of the canopy get cranked into that 10 percent or not? I would say that when I was when I was working on this, I was thinking that it was the PV, the inverters and the wiring that goes between them, and that was the number. And that's what numbers and what we did was we compared a project that actually I compared to the Hitchcock Center, something I saw had an involvement with and used the value of the PV there. And it was something in the order of five percent or four percent of the construction cost of the building. And I thought that making it 10 percent was has lots of wiggle room in it and we shouldn't get there. If we have to start building structure to hold these things up that is dedicated to them, I'm not sure where that sits. It's a good question. I think a really good question that we need to face up to. Linda, you want to can could you address perhaps the question about who in town would be the right contact? So he's sitting in the room and that's Sean. OK, and the reason I mentioned Sean and I just think we should stop right there is he knows what we do. OK, well, I will make note of that and we can have a follow up conversation. John, do you want to talk? Yeah, I mean, I guess I need to understand the what the question is and I can work with Donna and Margaret on this more if the question is, are we procuring the solar panels separately from the project itself? Yeah, we can work on what the process would be. I sort of envision this would be part of the design and when we go out to procure for construction, maybe there's a sub bit or the construction firm would hire a subcontractor to fulfill this. But I can work with the designer and the opium to figure out what's the you know, how do we get the best price and the best quality of solar panels for this project? Yeah, thank you, Sean. I think we'll soon soon to be bringing in solar design associates so that they're they're engaged from the very beginning as well with you all as as we look at the options and viability on both sites for PV. Good. Other other general questions or or should I begin to think to move ahead to the Denisco kind of presenting some initial thoughts and strategy strategies? Chris, is your hand still up or is that from before? Yes, it is, but I didn't mean to refer to me, but now I do. I I my question has to do with the kinds of standards that are not included in this bylaw and those have to do with the kind those are the kind of standards that show up and lead or living building challenge or passive house or something like that. Tell me this, is this to be a lead certified project? That's that's my question. Well, the one thing I can answer is that it will either be that or chips as part of the process that we go through with the MSBA. And certainly, it's probably going to be this committee that will which may the subcommittee, which may recommend to the broader committee, which are those two paths to take. And so in addition to to looking at, I probably should have said this at the top in addition to looking at specific net zero the questions and applicability and how we get there. This committee, the subcommittee will likely look at the broader issues around sustainability and try to, you know, advise and work with the design team towards those those goals. That almost sounds like a segue into the next section, but I see that Bruce has his end up. Jonathan, just to clarify what you just said, there's a huge difference between achieving the standards dictated by or established by lead or chips. And as far as leaders concern, for example, seeking certification, I would speak strongly in favour of the first, but strongly opposed to the proposition that we spend 60 or 80 or whatever thousand dollars to get a lead certification. I think we we have no I don't I can't see that there's brand value in doing that. So I guess the question then is does do we believe that we need to seek, purchase and achieve something like a lead certification? Is that something that this committee feels is important? Bruce, if I may just jump in. This is Donna Janesco. MSBA requires that the projects are certified either by lead or on New England chips. We don't have a choice, but I would like to just say that now a recent experience, the cost for the registration and certification is maybe around twenty thousand dollars that the design and all the level of effort that goes into it between the design team and the construction company is is already baked into the cost of the work. But the town is going to have to do either lead or chips because it's an MSBA project. Is chips also twenty thousand dollar price tag? I haven't done it lately, but I'm going to assume it is it is Vanshee's nodding. I mean, yeah, yeah, yeah, they kind of are in the same ballpark. It depends on the project scale and size, but yeah. And one more thing to just add to that conversation is also some of the pieces we are talking as part of the bylaws also aligned with, you know, the certification requirements. So we're not doing anything up and beyond what bylaws are asking. So in my opinion, there is some level of rigor associated with achieving these certification systems just helps the design team and construction teams to kind of follow the guidelines and ultimately, you know, get us a really good building that, you know, the town is going to own for a very long time. Chris, your hands raised again. Yes, it is. Can I speak briefly about the notion of renovation versus new construction? There is a big cranked into this bylaw, a sort of an incentive for buildings to be a dollar incentive for buildings to be renovated if they exist rather than torn down and replaced and building new construction. The bylaw doesn't doesn't affect renovation. And so the cost for renovating a square foot of existing building is all you doesn't involve any expenditure for renewable energy or for for anything really under the bylaw. So there's an incentive to renovate rather than a dollar incentive to renovate rather than to tear down and build new. I want to replace the case before this body about the virtue of the second one not over the first one that we should not consider. At least we're talking about the Fort River or the or the Boywood School buildings. These are buildings I'm not all from. I'm not always in the position of advocating that we tear things down and throw them away. In this case, I am because they are so bad as far as the energy their energy performance is concerned. I don't know if anybody knows how familiar with our factors, but the our factor of the exterior walls in both buildings is something like one and a half. For any I presume that we'll be talking about exterior wall are factors more in at least 10 times that or 15 times that. That's really bad. And the buildings have no under slab insulation. So that's zero insulation on the slab. The roofs are perhaps marginally OK. The buildings all have single glazed windows. So you're talking about something that is going to need to be reworked. If you try to keep these existing buildings, you have to keep you have to rework substantially the floor plans and you have to make them handicapped accessible. And you probably have to put in a new HVAC system, probably an electrical service, a whole. It's going to there's no virtue. There's no dollar virtue any more in trying to renovate either Wildwood or Fort River. And because it's because the numbers won't work. It won't be it. Numbers won't work and the atmosphere will be unhappy. We won't have. We won't have. We'll have a poorly, poorly performing buildings that that cost maybe a little bit. Yeah, let you less than or maybe even a little bit more than new construction. So I'm just placing the case for early on. Please don't try to renovate either Fort River or Wildwood buildings. Let's just get rid of them and start with a proper building. That's my statement. I see two more hands raised. I see Donna and Lynn. I think Donna's was up first, so I think I'm going to go to her next. But I'll start off by saying, while I hear you, Mr. Riddle, the process will require us to look at a broad range. And I'm sure Donna will touch on that. But we must, as part of the MSBA process, look at new construction, renovation and expansion and renovation. Yes, thank you. Yeah, no, that's it. Well, it's two things. And I see Marie Kappicki also has her hand up. But so we will look at. And Ernest, what it will take to make the existing building in part or whole as part of a renovation addition. A sound educational facility that will meet the criteria set forth by the town and also MSBA. MSBA also strict guidelines for certain energy requirements, etc. And we will have to do it. And, you know, it has to be an objective process. And we're weighing all of that out right now. We're putting together priorities and criteria evaluations, which way against all the options. And that will be important. MSBA, as far as reimbursement is concerned, MSBA will give communities a certain money, a percentage of the safe building. So as a reimbursement up to five points. So if you reuse an entire building with no addition, you get five percent more reimbursement by the state. If you use 10 percent, you get a portion of the five percent. So it becomes a formula. And in the end, unless you're reusing the entire building with a very small or no addition, the money kind of flips and that you don't get as much more payback by MSBA. But I do want to point that out, that that will be part of our evaluation. So you'll see how much money MSBA will be contributing. And probably more importantly to this community is what is the town share, right? And that that will all play out as we look at all the options. Lynn, I'm going to go to you next. And then we'll I'm not sure if Maria has been promoted to ask a question yet, but we'll figure that out after you, Lynn. Yeah, I'm not going to comment at this point on whether I think we should tear down the old building or not, because I preside over the body that's actually going to make a decision about what we're going to do in terms of going forward for the financing of this, not not the design, but the financing. But I want to also call attention and mention that in our audience today are both Laura Drucker, who is chair of our ECAC Committee and it also Maria Capecchi. I mean, I'm sorry. And also, oh, come on, where did she go? Stephanie Chickarella, who staffed to that committee and the fact that Amherst does have its own goals as well as the state goals for 2050 in terms of sustainability and that as we strive toward those goals, we need to look at whatever we do with regard to a renovation. Regardless of what this bylaw says in terms of contributing to the achievement of those goals. And at some point, Stephanie, I'm sure and Laura would be glad to make that report that they just had and brought to the council with our full acceptance to this body as well. Thank you. And Maria, I can see your hand raised by suspect. You can't ask your question yet, but why don't you try? Oh, you can. Yeah, I have. I don't see my picture, but I have the ability to unmute. Thank you, Donna. I want I want to appreciate your comments about needing to do a thorough analysis of renovation. And there are some people who have the opinion that this this should not be renovated and not even address it from the beginning. But as you all well know, that's that's not what we are required to do, nor is that opinion shared by everyone in town or by many people in the Sustainability Architecture Committee. And I know that you have probably all attended MSBA conferences talking about sustainability and talking about renovation. So this does have to be explored and thoroughly and letting people know that we are not coming to a predestined conclusion. So I really I appreciate that your comments there, Donna. Thank you. Well, unless folks have additional questions directly on the bylaw, I would like, since we have a certain limited amount of time and I want to to drop something off our agenda for today, this first meeting, I think I'd like to hand things over to Donna for a while to present some thoughts. After that, we're going to be we can come back to some questions and discussions and then we can open things up for additional public comments. Donna. Yeah, thank you. Actually, Tim Cooper and Vampsy Vampsy, do you have a question? Yeah, I do have a presentation. I think Sonny's going to share her screen. Yeah, yeah, I can share my screen. I don't know if you were together, but it's crazy when you two are both on that's usually my computer. I don't know. It's acoustics in my office. It's bad. All right. Maybe I can just take. Take the conversation here and set the stage just so we just wanted to talk a few things, the primary goal for us to for this, at least the first meeting is to kind of give you a layout of how we typically achieve a zero net energy school building. And these are based on our experience working on currently a few Z&E schools in the Massachusetts area or state of Massachusetts. These are some of the successful steps and also some strategies. We're not going to get too much into the strategies. And depending on how, you know, how much time we have, we are more than willing to talk about them as well. But we wanted to kind of bring everybody on the same page and kind of give out a perspective of how the roadmap looks for a Z&E building. The first and foremost thing I'd like to talk about is what is a Z&E building. And I'm assuming everybody knows it, but just for the purposes of common definition, there are several definitions, but in alignment with Amherst's bylaw, what we are forcing Z&E definition would be is the building is going to use as much energy as it's going to produce that onsite. And given that this is going to be all electric, which is the right direction for Z&E buildings for several reasons, we can talk about that. We would like to our primary goal is to reduce the what we call as EUI, which stands for energy use intensity number, which is basically taking your annual energy use in BTUs and normalizing over the square footage of the building. And what that really does is helps us to understand how our school works or performs compared to other schools. And for schools, typically, we have seen a target of 25 to 28 to achieve a Z&E status. And when we say, you know, why not higher or lower? Definitely, you can shoot for lower or higher, but you know, conservation is the most important thing. We can make an inefficient building and put a lot of PV, which does not make sense. So our primary goal here as part of the Z&E process is to reduce the amount of energy this building is going to use. So if you look at the most of the Z&E schools in our climate zones, we are talking about 25 EUI or in the ballpark, including Massive actually has a Z&E path one program which dictates that EUI to be 25. And here's a benchmark just to give a sense to the folks on the meeting here, how different buildings have been using EUI. These are not net zero buildings, all of them, but the Z&E buildings are in the green color. So you can see there between 25 to 30 EUI. And this is what's going to drive our analysis as we move forward to ensure our envelope. And we were talking earlier about existing versus a completely new building and there are challenges for existing buildings. Then how do we make it work so that we still meet our low EUI? And one more thing is all the PV renewable energy system is an integral part of the discussion. We kind of heavily focus on making the EUI as small as possible, as I mentioned, because that takes a lot of effort from all disciplines on the design team. So we work very collaboratively. We try to have every discipline on the discussion so that we can look at any synergies between decisions that we're making as the design progresses. So if you want to the next slide. So this is a typical process. This is not all exhaustive list of conservation measures and strategies we look at, but just to give you a snapshot, how that works. So we're starting with a high baseline MSB, a baseline in our case because that is the code to build to. The first and foremost thing is to improve the envelope, improve or reduce the loads. So when you have very minimal loads, you know, the mechanical systems and entry systems can be smaller. First of all, because you have smaller loads and they can efficiently add heating or cooling to space. So that is the sequence of things on how we look at. And then we go and talk about daylighting, how the daylight is harvested into the building. Of course, with LED technology, the amount of savings that you were getting before the LEDs were prevalent is lower, but there are other pieces to also look at. More daylight, not necessarily mean a good goal. We have to balance between glare and how much daylight we're getting and also look at how that impacts our energy performance because more glass means we are losing more heat as well. So we will do that analysis, integrated analysis when we're performing energy modeling pieces. And then we come to the HMAC system, which significantly reduces the energy and that is the system that is going to take care of all the heating and cooling needs. And heat pump technology has come a long way, even in very cold temperatures, it can perform at higher efficiencies. And there are various configurations that Simon may talk about it today. During this meeting, we will evaluate those mechanical systems. And then ultimately, what we have found is the user behavior is very important for ZNE schools to be successful. And the reason is the design team can deliver a really good envelope, a really good HAC system. Ultimately, if the users are not aware of how these things work, they may start using the building in a different way and which could increase the energy use. And the other piece is the commissioning that is required by bylaw as well and also MSPA, so that's a no brainer. But we've seen more often than we'd like to admit that things don't work as they should, although the system and designs everything are great. There are so many things that are identified during commissioning process. And I think it's a very important piece for ZNE schools and also post-hoccipital studies would be great just so that you understand where exactly things went wrong. Is it during operations or is something in the HVAC system that failed? So that you can rectify and really get the performance that we would evaluate or assess during these design phases. And ZNE can move on. So one of the key pieces for this to hit this really low UI target is you know, front loaded analysis because design is moving very fast. What we would like to do is do this analysis. Typically in a typical building, you know, you kind of laid out during design development and do analysis, which is too late. We want to make sure these decisions are made early on so that when we go to, you know, at the end of the PSR or SD phase, we know pretty much what the building is going to look like and what systems are going to go in. There might be a few tweaks once you are in design development phase, but most of the important and key systems are in place or in base of design. Oh, we will share our work plan. Sorry, sorry, you guys, you guys, you can't we keep getting echoes. Yeah, sorry, I was just going to say we got to share our work plan at the end of this discussion. So I think bottom line for everyone, we will be having lots of conversations with you all to make sure that everyone's in agreement with everything that we will be including as part of and how we're going to achieve. We're looking at around the 25 UI is our goal for this for the for the building, whether it's innovation or or new. Our goal is to have it around 25 UI. And there are different ways to get there. And then the question really becomes, which I believe maybe that would be the next conversation. Vanshee is how what what if it if it's non fossil and it's going to be PBEs. We still have to talk about the systems and how we're going to actually provide the heat and the cooling into the building and what the distribution of that would look like. Yeah, and Christopher has a question. Chris, sorry, go ahead. Oh, I can talk. Yeah, yeah, I have. What is this bill? This bylaw says nothing about embodied energy, embodying carbon. Will that be part of your considerations when we're thinking of, for instance, the structural system and so forth? Yeah, we can take a look at it. Obviously, the bylaw is talking about primarily operational energy or operational carbon. Am I echoing? Yeah. Yeah. Did you catch what I said, Christopher? I'm sorry. Sorry. What? I think you didn't hear. OK, let me repeat myself. If you can. But I'm, I'm, I'm echoing. And I'm in a mess. There you go. Yeah. No, you know, obviously what I was saying is bylaw is talking about operational carbon, not necessarily looking at the embodied carbon. But, you know, the certification system LEED has one credit that actually touches upon the embodied carbon, which uses life-cycle assessment to look at retaining the existing structure or using building materials that have lowest embodied carbon. So that could be part of our analysis, but that goes parallel with the operational carbon analysis. Hi, I just wanted to ask, thanks for walking us through this. Would your go-to system for HVAC be a geothermal system? And then if we can't accommodate that from a safe perspective, then move on. Would that be your first go-to for HVAC? I can respond to that. We would actually like to have that conversation with you all and look at the different options. It could be a VRF system or it could be a geothermal system. We've done both. And really it will be a matter of what, it's your decision, right? It will come down to, we will perform a life-cycle cost analysis and you can evaluate, right? There may be more first cost with the geothermal than a VRF system, but we'll walk through the different options and the different sites are unique. And so there may be different parameters and costs associated with the geothermal system at both sites, right? We have wet on one and ledge and everything going on at the other one. So I think we want to, we don't have any preconceived direction. We want to weigh it all with you all for you to determine what works best for you all. So ability to accommodate geothermal will be part of the site evaluation considerations and is that what I'm hearing? Yes. Awesome. I'm going to use my headphones. I think this would be a little better. Yeah, just to add to that also what we have seen Sarah is geothermal obviously is the most efficient system right now available. It's going to definitely get us the lowest energy possible, but as Donna has mentioned, there are other considerations to look at the site issues and also the life-cycle cost analysis. Some of the ZNE schools that we are working on, it has, I'm probably getting too much into details, but 100% of geothermal did not get us a good return on investment. So we looked into partial, like a hybrid system and that made a whole lot of sense. So that would become, come as part of our analysis when we start looking at it and definitely every project is different, but that's the team that we have seen. I see another raised hand from Bruce. Yes, I guess a specific question on daylighting, but it has to do with establishing a metric. By the way, I think, as you can tell, I'm not deeply impressed by LEED or so forth. I'm much more impressed with establishing our own measurable objectives, which LEED attempts to do, but I think we can do that and better. So far as daylighting is concerned, does the team feel that it's reasonable to establish, as a measurable objective, the highest daylight autonomy level, not the highest, but the highest as far as, say, CHIPS is concerned with a 300 lux at 75% of the classroom area. Perhaps, is it Nicole, who's your daylight team? Perhaps, Nicole, you could explain how you measure and know that you've achieved a high standard of daylighting, what the highest standard, what the highest level that is of the three levels that are distributed in CHIPS, for example. What it means, and my question to you is, is it reasonable for classrooms? I am absolutely focused on classrooms. I don't really care as much about, for example, the cafeteria or the gym offices certainly for people who are there, but the rooms that are populated by people, by lots of people for the bulk of the day, classrooms and offices I care about and classrooms in particular. So I'd like to know whether we can reasonably expect for all classrooms to have the highest guideline level of daylight autonomy in those classrooms. So explain my question, if you can better than I asked it, and tell me whether it's a reasonable design objective. Yeah, yeah, for sure. Yeah, so just for some background, and then I can go into some of the specifics of the question you've asked, Bruce. So I think just similar to energy, like Bamshi was saying, getting in early and thinking about this, you know, at this stage is great. And it's really important to be coordinated with all design team members on the screen are just some daylight considerations that we think of at this stage. I'm just going to go through them one by one, and then we can go into some of the specific metrics as well. But the climate and building orientation, obviously, if the decision is to stay with the existing building renovation, that's obviously limited for a new building, this would be something that would be the building orientation and massing would be something that would be greatly considered early on, thinking about, again, if it's a new building, floor to floor height, floor plan layout, we use rules of thumb really early on, you know, so daylight, for example, penetrates two and a half times the head height of the window. So we have ideas, you know, we know, we know how climate works, we know how daylight works, and we can think about those things early to understand how it's working with the orientation and geometry of the different spaces, and specifically like you've noted, Bruce, we pay particular attention to classrooms that's really critical there, understanding, you know, the depth of the daylight into there, and whatever, you know, if it is the building renovation, obviously, there's more limitations there, but we really work with tuning it with electric lighting, making sure daylight dimming zones are properly zoned and thought about, and that the electric lighting strategies are highlighting that and balancing it, so you have an even, you know, uniform level of light across the classrooms, there's not contrast there for the students. A lot of these, like I said, are a lot more geared towards, you know, if the decision is to be a new building, you know, glass selection, there's renovation, obviously, there may be some opportunity there for window replacement, so thinking about the optimal visible light transmittance, but also linking back to energy, obviously, there's certain codes we have to meet with energy, but not necessarily with daylight, so thinking about the solar heat gain coefficient as well, and that sort of thing, interior material reflectances, shading, like I said, lighting controls and energy, so those are the things we think about early, we like to coordinate with all design team members and make sure we've got that tuned really well. And, you know, some of the benefits, as I'm sure all of you know, daylight has, you know, it's a quantifiable tested impact on health, well-being and productivity, it's proven that, you know, having a connection to outdoors can be beneficial, it can help with circadian rhythm, and then it's not as big of a benefit just with the advent of LEDs, but also energy use, and we can look at that and, you know, analyze that and make sure we're counting for that in any sort of energy analysis, so that's really what we think about, so then just taking that and going back to Bruce's question, so there's many daylight metrics out there, you know, we, I would fully agree that, you know, some of the daylight standards out there are not necessarily the best measure, I guess generally the way that we think about it is taking all of these rules of thumb considerations and using the metrics that we feel works best for a different, for a certain program is the best way to go about it, and that doesn't always align with, with lead or chips. Lead and chips both, you know, they have those specific metrics, and I would argue that some of those metrics could be, you know, could lead to a limited definition of daylight, so we really look at each of our daylight analyses that we do very specific to the program, and for classrooms in particular, we often look at annual daylight, but we don't necessarily do it when we're designing, when we're thinking about sizing windows or BLT for the glass and all that, we don't necessarily feel that, you know, some of those standards reflect the good daylight that's happening, you know, so we, we try to choose the metrics specific to, you know, what we're looking at. So, for example, we use something called daylight autonomy. We usually use it for 300 lux for a classroom, but it's slightly different than the lead spatial daylight autonomy. We also, a lot of times, will go into further metrics such as luminance, which is like a visual image of a space that contains lighting information and can really help you understand how a space is going to feel, and then we'll look at glare metrics as well. So I know there's a lot of information, hopefully, that starts to capture, you know, or address your question, Bruce, if there's anything specific you were curious about, happy to address it. Nick, Nicole, if I could also just jump in on that, and Bruce, thank you very much for making your first statement that sometimes the devil's in the detail with lead or chips, and it might or might not, you know, you might not necessarily be able to achieve it to the letter of the law, so to speak, but making sure that the intent is there for your community. We just went through this with another community, and they just wanted to make sure, like you said, they had daylighting in the classrooms. It didn't have to be every single space per se, but there were priorities in what some of the items they wanted to achieve, which might not get you the extra point with lead. But with that said, and as Nicole kind of went through everything, and it sounds like you have quite a lot of experience with daylighting, is that we need to take daylighting into consideration as we look at the net zero requirements as well, and how are we going to achieve the low EUI that we need, and so we're all going to have to work together in finding the right balance of the amount of glazing compared to insulation, compared to maybe some of the other factors in order to achieve a low EUI for the net zero. I had one more question on daylighting, if I may. This morning, Steven, could I just ask one quick question of Donna before you do that? Donna, how many more slides do you have to go through? I just want to make sure that we get through the rest of the presentation and keep the questions running. I see a couple of their hands up too. This should be the end. Yeah, we're more here to have a conversation. So these were just talking points, but thank you. Go ahead, Bruce. Sorry about that. I just didn't want to miss it. In the visioning session, the presenter mentioned on two or three occasions when we were talking about daylighting, which happened occasionally. It was relevant to the visioning part of it. Exemplified light shelves, and Donna, I have done quite a lot of study over the years of both in buildings that I've built and also daylight modeling, physical daylight, modeling, measuring, and pretty much established that in this climate, which is substantially overcast, 51% of the hours of the daylight here, the light shelves suppress light. They're really a strategy, in my view, for at least in my view from when I was practicing four or six years ago. They're a strategy for the Southwest where you have 75% of your hours in daylighting. So I guess the question is, though you guys know something that I don't, that would flip that on its head, that suddenly light shelves are useful and not an inhibiting a solution concept for daylighting in our climate. Or do you, or as Steven's interest in light shelves, not something that's shared by the team? Yeah. So, you know, light shelves are, I think, a controversial topic. I think everyone has an opinion about them. There are some truths and there are some myths of what you said is exactly right. It's more for the South or Southwest. It depends on, you know, the amount of overcast versus clear sky. For clear sky days, the benefit of light shelves is I think a lot of people think that they literally bounce light onto the floor plate. What they actually do is they bounce light onto the ceiling, which helps illuminate that surface. And then they also, at the same time, cut down the perimeter brightness. So they're actually reducing light at the perimeter. But what that's doing is creating a more even uniform space throughout, you know, the classroom, for example. And so when a student or the teacher is looking, it feels more visually appealing. It might feel brighter in terms of actual luminance levels. You know, it's up for debate or up for study, I would say. We have in particularly studied the actual light levels. It would be a very interesting study that we've thought about for a while. But hopefully that helps answer your question. I think it is something we could definitely explore here. But we want to, you know, we could run cases with and without in some studies. And then also, like I said, you know, exploring in real life, real buildings, we've always been curious about actually measuring the illuminance. And so I'm sure someone's done that study or perhaps something that we should endeavor, that we should undertake at some point. And so, yeah, it's something if it were to be considered, we definitely would want to study it and think closely about it. So, Bruce, yeah, back to your comment about David, David Steven, I know two first names get to me every time. He I think was just spent speaking generally and holistically, but so I wouldn't say that that was a blanket statement that we would employ as Nicole mentioned. But thank you. Nicole, if you give me your email address or if I can get it, I'll send you the paper that my colleagues and I wrote doing exactly what you said. Oh, perfect. Yeah, that'd be great. But the climatic conditions haven't changed that much either to you somehow or other. Yeah, Bruce, that, you know, it'll be great if you want to run it through Kathy, Shane, yeah, and Shane and show me sure that it's distributed so we all have it. That would be perfect. I'll get it to everyone. Thank you. Donna, do you think we could take the screen share down and folks could see more people if we're going to have more discussion? Yeah, sure. Do we just the only other thing was just kind of how we were going to kind of our schedule or next steps, but we don't need to share that now. I think we are truly excited to be here. This conversation is one of our first conversations because it's so important to get it right and get it right at the beginning and make sure that everyone here on this call and I'm sure there are others that are with us as we start making decisions along the way because there'll be many decisions. I don't want to say they'll be mutually exclusive, but there will be decisions and compromises that we're all going to have to make while we achieve then the net zero for the project. So we really appreciate and you're also educated in all of this. So it's great that we're not starting from zero, no pun intended. I believe we have a question from Laura and I'm going to say Drucker, but maybe I pronounced it wrong. Yeah, thanks Jonathan. Laura Drucker, I'm the Chair of the Energy and Climate Action Committee in town. I just wanted to, maybe I'm still trying to understand the process and so maybe this feeds into the next part, but as Lynn said earlier, I know we do have climate goals in town and I'm just trying to understand how we ensure and as close to an apples and to apples comparison of different options, particularly when we're talking about an option that may involve renovation versus a new build, which means that the renovated option may not have the net zero bylaw applied to it. I'm just trying to figure out what is the requirements from MSBA around lead certification for a renovation versus a new building? How do we make sure that we're getting as close to apples to apples in terms of the sustainability of the different options? Sure. I think while we appreciate your bylaw somewhat excluding the renovated portion as part of it, but we look at every building holistically and so our goal would be for a net zero energy or the low EY on the building, whether it's a renovation addition or sorry or new construction and then if we can't achieve that, we would clearly articulate why or why a renovation addition maybe has a higher EY than a new construction, but with all of our renovation additions, we bring it up to the same level as we would new construction. We understand people have been concerned, for example, at Fort River that there's a lot of moisture or some other issues because the site's wet, all of that would be addressed during a renovation addition, so we wouldn't compromise the renovation portion of any building, it would be at the same standards as a new building. We will have Apple to Apple comparisons maybe some benefits to renovation addition and then there are going to be other benefits to new construction, cost might influence it, duration of construction is going to influence it because we don't have swim space for the students, right? There's a lot of other considerations that are going to go into what makes the most sense for you as a community. Does that help you? Yeah, maybe just specifically, so the renovated option would also be fossil fuel free, correct, 100%. Yes, 100%. Thank you. Mr. Will, do you have your hand up again or was it just left up? You're muted as well. Sorry. Regarding my early rant, I think the message I was trying to get across is that my belief is based on 30 years of experience, is that by the time you have done what you have to do to the envelope and to the layout and to the HVAC and to accessibility and to, well, those things you will have bought a new building. That's my feeling. And I have not based on any detailed analysis, it's based on just my gut level feeling after 30 years in the trade. That's the message. I think that the reason you don't want to renovate those buildings is because it will cost you more to do it than to just start all over. That's my message. So other questions, should we look now, Donna, at the timeline for how we're going to assist you in making decisions? Sure. Sunny, is that something you can pull up? So these are the next steps we are thinking of, and as everyone said, we want to have a really collaborative process and talk to the team and work really closely with you guys on all the decisions. And so the first goal of our next step is agree on a UI target. So we can get our work started and usually we recommend 25 UI as the starting point for high-performance schools. And then we will evaluate sites for their potential, looking at how much PV we can fit in there and orientation of the site and extra. Then we will compare the massing and make some recommendations for the envelope. And once those are selected, we will do HVAC study, compare different options, and do a life cycle cost analysis for different options and day lighting analysis. Make sure the classrooms have good day lighting while we still achieve our energy goals. And our goal is by June 27th, we will have a basis of design that meets the bylaw requirements. And we have envelope HVAC massing or selected for the basis of design. So we have a lot of work to do between now and then. And our goal would be to maybe make this a regular meeting that we have with you all so that we can kind of a standing meeting so that, you know, every three weeks or whatever, I think we need to make sure we can get enough work done to have a forward-thinking conversation every time. But it will be important that we continue this conversation all the way through. And PSR is the preferred schematic report which we'll be submitting to MSBA. And that submission is what our preferred solution is to move forward. So we will be looking at repair-only renovation addition and new construction. We will at one point be looking at two sites. So by June 27th, we need to pick the site and if it's a renovation addition or new construction. And all of that, we really need to understand our goals. And as Sunny laid out here, how we're going to achieve your EUI and your net zero goals because that will have cost implications which we also need to submit at PSR. So Donna, one of my first questions for you is going to be, you know, knowing that you want to have some time to do some substantial work between meetings, for you and the design team, what is the right pattern to our ongoing meetings? How much time would you like? Will they vary so that we can, so more principally me as the chair of the subcommittee can begin to set up a series of dates? Yeah, thank you, John. Jonathan, right now we are doing an enormous amount of fact-finding in the month of January and identifying the priorities and everything. We've already started our site exploration, so we had test pits and boring, so now we need to analyze it all and understand what that means. So if it's okay with you, we can put together a schedule and send it to you so that it aligns with the other work that we have to do, that would be great. That is about 20 minutes after three and our schedule time is to end at 3.30. I still see some hands up and so I'm going to ask some additional questions, so I've got another series of folks that popped up. I believe next is Sarah Ross and then I'm going to go to Russ Marin Jones and Maria Capecchi. That's kind of the order I saw them in. I apologize if I'm out of order. Thanks. Just two quick things to put it in for future conversation. One is, you know, since Jonathan kind of advertised that this this group will consider more than just ZNE, but kind of the broader sustainability considerations, I'm looking forward to talking about kind of what role climate resilience and what investments we should be thinking about from a climate resilience perspective in these buildings and that could certainly go into sighting and and other elements of the building. So excited to hear your thoughts on that. And then the other piece, which you know, I know is is beyond, you know, buildings per se, but expecting a transition to look school buses, you know, how do we think about preparing and choosing a site that will accommodate that part of our energy transition for Amherst and, you know, every source may have some thoughts on that. You all will have thoughts on that. And so excited to kind of be pushing some of those peripheral, but, you know, important to think about now kind of topics. So thanks. Thank you, Russ. Yeah, I just want to very much appreciate the love of expertise and attention to detail here and the emphasis on low EUI. And also to underline what Lynn Griesmeere and Laura Drucker said is that really aside from our bylaw, aside from the MSBA requirements, we as a town are headed toward being a net zero town, and not just by 2050, but getting a 50% reduction by 2030. And we want, we want that to inform the project as much as the bylaw, you know, we are and to keep it in the context that we're in a global climate crisis that is an emergency at this point. And my hope, and I was a principal of one of these buildings, one of the old buildings for many, many years, is that the process of building the building can be an educational process for the town around net zero, and that the building once completed assists students to learn about building systems and net zero energy. Thank you. Thank you. Maria. Thank you. I just want to also acknowledge Jonathan and some other former members that I served with on the Port River feasibility study, and to really appreciate the fact that you're running a great meeting again, Jonathan. Thank you. And that it's lovely to have all of these voices from the community as as you might have figured out by now, there's a lot of folks with a lot to say and it's a it's really terrific to have this forum to do this. Thank you so much. Thank you. I see a hand up from Bruce, but I also see a hand up from Stephanie. And so I'm just going to kind of go in the order that I see them on the screen. So Bruce. On the topic of the energy use intensity goals or objective, it hasn't been said here, but it was on the seminar that we many of us attended, that Eversource has a set of incentives that are available. But I think they have a EUA of 25 or less. So obviously 25 is more than just an arbitrary statement or goal if we intend to as we should benefit from whatever source might be offering. So that's one additional reason for going with 25 at least. My second thought is that over the years, I've noticed because I've been checking up on the energy use intensive energy use of not just my buildings, but some of the interesting buildings that I've done by my colleagues and particularly in Europe. And the thing that I've noticed is that if a building is very successful and we all hope our buildings are successful, success is typically means that it's more used and if it's more use, the energy use intensity is going to go up. So we are in a situation where if we do a very good project, our EUI is going to rise. If we want to keep it at 25, maybe we should establish a lower EUI going in. And so my question to us or to the design team would be, well to us, why not do that? Why not establish one that's a little lower than 25? And to the team, at this point, as you are doing more of these, if we were to establish an EUI of, I don't know, arbitrarily 22, say, or even 20. I noticed that many of the projects in the case studies that we've seen that have been passed around, the EUIs are in the teens. I acknowledge that many of these are in different climates and that might make a big difference. So we might want to manage our expectations around this a little. But what tension exists from a design cost and deliverability point of view to establishing a lower, let's say somewhere down towards 20 kilobits per square foot per year as the EUI design goal for this building? I can take a shot at that. So we absolutely can look at the implications as we get to 25 EUI. This is what this would mean to get to 20 EUI. Here might be some of the requirements to get to a lower EUI. I don't think any of us are saying let's stop at 25. For sure, our goal would be to get as low as possible. But we also, like you said, perfect example is if you build it, they will come. And so we need to make sure that we do want it to be a highly used community asset. So how can we achieve that while keeping the EUIs low? So we're not saying we're going to stop at 25. We will continue to push it and then we can share with you the implications of how we get it down lower than that. And Bruce, I also want to say that we absolutely will assist the town and the rebates and initiatives with Eversource or anyone else. And we'll start those conversations now as well, which will also help, you know, the town with your initiatives. And if I can, sorry, sorry, Jonathan. I'm just going to add to what Don was talking about. I would like to take the opportunity also to tie in a couple of statements the community members have made. Specifically, Russ has pointed out the opportunity to, you know, the part of construction and the design of this building being as a teaching tool for the children. And that also is a very important piece when it comes to actual operation energy use intensity. If what we have been seeing again and again on all these Z&E schools is close to 40 to 50 percent of the UI is related to the, what we call as plug loads, you know, which are completely out of the control of the design team. It's in the control of the occupants. So if the occupants are engaged with the building, they understand, you know, not to plug unnecessary things in the outlets and, you know, how conscience they are using their buildings, it will drive the UI down on year one of operations and onwards. So it's a great opportunity to kind of tie in those two goals that community have and also the town has. So I'm going to try to slip another question in here from Stephanie because I think she had her hand up first. What I should say is if we don't get to your question, well, we will be meeting again, but certainly it also can be put in an email either to Kathy or to myself. And we'll make sure that the question gets out to the design team. Stephanie. Hi, Jonathan. Thank you so much. I don't have a question. Actually, I did want to say that I shared the link to the town's climate action adaptation and resilience plan with Kathy Schoen, and I've asked her to send that to the entire committee. And I really strongly ask you to take a look at that, especially the sections about what the town's goals are and then also our building and renewable energy goals. Please take a look at that. You don't have to read the rest of it, but we think that's especially poignant and important for this project. And also I do want to reiterate some of what's been said about that those goals about carbon neutrality and sustainability go beyond just looking at the EUI of the building. And so I would really hope that after looking at the plan that you consider the broader goals of the town that the town council voted on and adopted for the town. Great. Thank you. Well, I think I'm going to move us to an adjournment for today. We will be posting a series of additional meetings and obviously an agenda for each of those so that folks will know what's coming up on that particular day's topic. So I think I need someone from my subcommittee to move us to adjournment. Jonathan, can I just ask one quick question? Sure. We had talked about the next meeting being the week of January 31st, which is really the first week of February. Do we want to talk here before we let everybody go about that date? Or Donna, this is really a question for you and your team. She had said that she was going to send me something to email and make sure that she has sufficient time. They're gathering a lot of data at the moment. We may or may not make that particular week. So Jonathan, I'll make a motion to adjourn and I just want to assure, I think I have almost everybody's email that I see on the list of who's here today. But if we don't have it, just send it to me or Jonathan. So as the lists get set up and we post them, you're aware of it. We tried to do our best to get the notice out about the meeting today, but we would like it to be inclusive. And I really thank everyone for coming. I'll make a motion to adjourn. All in favor and off we go. Thank you.