Plans still in works for new school building project

by Dan McClelland

Superintendent of Schools Russ Bartlett at the board of education meeting earlier this month presented a report on the latest chapter of the current building project saga. Every five to seven years the district embarks on a multi-year project to upgrade school buildings. The most recent one about five years ago included among other things major renovations to the high school auditorium, the completion of the heated community room- named in honor of civic center-builder, Phil Edwards, at the local arena, and a reconfigured parking arrangement at the L.P.Quinn Elementary School.

Most of the major infrastructure improvement campaigns of late have been financed in large part by generous amount of state building aid.

“This is something you have been hearing about forever,” the superintendent joked as he began his report that evening.

“When we first started talking about this (in recent years), you’ll remember we had a building conditions survey (required by the state education department) that was due.”

“-And we were also looking for an architect, so we sent that out to bid. C.S. Arch was the architectural firm that gave us a bid on architectural services and completing the building conditions survey.”

“We knew going into this there would be some things identified in the building conditions that we were going to have to address. We know, there are things in the middle/high school, but at this building too- the L.P. Quinn School, he said from the Michelle LaMere Memorial Library where school board meetings are now convened.

He said in both buildings, “the set-up for someone coming in is less than ideal. At the middle/high school they come in the door by the auditorium and walk unattended some 50 feet down the hall. That should never happen in 2023!”

He also noted that everyone knows “that things are going to continue to be problems, so we need to be able to address them.”

“When we initially talked about this, we said our goal was not a huge project...addressing things we needed to do.” He said the financial aim at the time was to keep the project total under $10 million. That felt that was the financially responsible way to go!”

Then we got the building conditions survey back “-and we had to remove anything that wasn’t a building conditions survey finding or a safety issue.”

“Right now there is nothing in this project which is a ‘wish list’ item.” He said many of the things that officials felt needed to be addressed” in the next building project “got pushed down to a lower priority...things that need to be done, but that we don’t have the (financial) wherewithall to do at this point.”

“As of January, 2023, when we last met with the architects, we had removed everything from the list that was not a direct result of the building conditions survey and/or changing the entry to both buildings to make then more secure. And we are still struggling very hard to get the project total under $20 million!”

He said the current goal is to get the project total to be about $18 million.

So what changed? Labor and building materials have gone through the roof in the last three years. “We can’t forget the middle/high school building is almost 90 years old. Any time you start messing around with stuff that was built in the 1930s, you have the potential for all kinds of things to go wrong.”

The roof at L.P. Quinn “is in rough shape, and replacing it is probably the largest single cost associated with this project.”

He said also at the high school you have a 1934-vintage building attached to a 1954 building which is attached to a 1970-something building which has a 1980-something attachment. Added too are “attachments” in the 1990s and the 2000s, he told the elected school leaders.

He said he was personally familiar with the improvements to that building in the 2000s, “because that’s where my classroom used to be.”

“The plumbing in that portion of the building has all be replaced.”

“We have to address what all we have to do. The buildings are all well maintained.” He said, however, the roof at the elementary school is in critical need of repair!”

“So just to be clear, a building project is separate from a building project?” Board President Jane Whitmore asked at that point.

Business Manager Dan Bower explained they are similar but different in this school district. Here “capital projects” are the kind addressed in smaller sums in annual school budget. What school officials call “building projects” are also capital projects but they are larger and more extensive in scope and “too large to address in any given year.”

Capital projects require the approval of district’s voters in a building referendum, he noted.

Capital projects are financed by bonds negotiated by the district and paid off in successive years.

Superintendent Bartlett said he will continue to work closely with C.S. Arch through April to determine the exact scope of work that will be included in this project. He and Mr. Bower will also be consulting in coming months with Bernard Donnegan’s firm, the district’s financial consultants “to determine what the financial impact is on the community so we can explain that in detail to out taxpayers. -And then we finalize our plans.”

Once the final figures are arrived at, they will be provided to the architect to determine final cost estimates, he explained.

He expected that work should be completed about August when district officials will conduct a series of public meeting to explain the project fully to taxpayers.

He predicted a public vote in October this year.

On a related issue, the repair or replacement of the elevator at the high school, he said he talked with the district’s architect and “the prep work they were planning to do over spring break” to prepare for the work itself, they had a rough idea of what that should cost. “So we put it out to bid and we received one bid. It was five times higher” that the architect’s initial estimate for that part of the project.

“We are working with the architects right now to figure out what are options are at this point.” He said the architects are also working with the company that submitted the bid to see if its offer could be tailored somewhat. “There was a concern there may have been some overlap in” the two parts of the project and we’re looking to see why the bid came in so much higher than the estimates.”