The issue of the additional $6 million appropriation for the high school expansion project will come to the voters Oct. 7. We believe this is the right project at the right time for Newtown. The high school is overcrowded today. Students struggle – and often fail -- to get into the classes they need to complete mandated graduation requirements. The lack of adequate differentiated learning spaces – such as science labs – directly affects a student’s ability to pursue the pre-requisites for their intended college major. Many classes are taught in inappropriate settings, and students are often forced into an unsupervised free period, which raises security and safety issues. This bad situation will only worsen as Newtown’s wave of larger classes begins entering the high school in September 2009.
Waiting to fix this problem is not a viable option. Many state economic experts predict that the costs of construction will escalate substantially if we delay and rebid the project. These risks are too great. The project as designed provides the critical differentiated learning space Newtown needs now.
Please vote in this important referendum: Oct. 7, 6 a.m. to 8 p.m. at Newtown Middle School.
For background information, blueprints, financial details, and a video, please click here
Q & A
When the bids for a project like this exceed the estimated amount, there are, of course, many questions. Some of those questions are addressed below.
Q1. What is the cost of this $6 million referendum to the taxpayer?
Bob Tait, Newtown’s finance director, has produced a chart that shows the estimated annual tax burden based on assessed house value. To see the entire tax impact document produced by Mr. Tait, and understand what your tax cost will be for the additional $6 million, click here.
Q2: What is the plan if the referendum does not pass? Is there a plan to cut $5M, $4M, $3M, $2M, etc.?
The project cannot be easily cut without significant redesign. With the exception of the track and field, the components are interconnected. Currently, the track is in disrepair. It is estimated that to replace it alone would cost $400,000. If the track and field were eliminated, that cost is $1.1 million, but the field costs would go up because that bid was based on doing both site work and the field. The next lowest field bid was $1.6 million. That being said, due diligence in trying to value engineer any savings has been ongoing. Every possible substitution of material has, or is, being analyzed to save costs. Since this expansion was designed to be as frugal as possible, there is little that can be scaled back.
If this project does not pass, the town will have to start the process over with a new design, resubmit plans to the state for approval, and will still have no guarantee that it will come in under $38 million – a process that will take 18-24 months. Meanwhile, the students at the High School are in overcrowded conditions even longer.
In addition, a redesign would severely weaken Newtown’s case for a waiver on the green buildings law, potentially adding 10% in cost to a redesign.
Q3: How did we get to this point where an additional referendum is needed?
In April the Newtown community overwhelmingly voiced their support for alleviating the existing overcrowded conditions at the High School by passing a referendum for a $38 million expansion. After considerable scrutiny by the Board of Education, Board of Finance, Legislative Council, Board of Selectmen, and Public Building & Site Commission this expansion has been determined to be the most viable solution to give our students the most effective learning environment. It also provides the diversified learning space needed to allow each student to take the classes they need to graduate and pursue the college major of their choice.
The need for the high school expansion project – with its diversified learning spaces --has not changed. The project, as originally presented to the voters last April, is still the best option. What has changed is the economy. Since March, steel prices have risen 40 percent, and petroleum has risen 78 percent, significantly impacting the bids Newtown received. This economic situation also forced bidders to increase their escalation costs for a project that spans 23 months.
On July 29 the bids were opened for this project and it was clear that the bid amounts were coming in over the projected $38 million. As the scope analysis was conducted, some of the lowest bidders were disqualified for significant reasons, and the second lowest bidder was then selected. This further increased the overage. Additionally, since this project is multi-year, projections that go into the second year have an additional escalation factor built into the bids. With the price for steel escalating to a record high, as have petroleum products, materials costs came in beyond estimates. Thus, this project currently stands $6,045,454 over the estimated $38 million. This figure does include those items that were bid alternates: The track and field, the lightning suppression, and interior ground face blocks.
The construction manager, architect, building and site committee members, and school district representatives agonized over items to value engineer to lower this overage. Every detail, even down to the material in the handrails, was analyzed for a less expensive option, but because this project had already been so thoroughly scrutinized, there was very little that could be taken from the project to capture enough savings to get the costs below the approved amount of $38 million. Thus, the Public Building and Site Commission, then followed by the Board of Education, the Legislative Council, and Board of Selectmen recommended that the Newtown High School expansion project be placed before the voters in a referendum for the additional $6,045,454.
The referendum vote will be Tuesday, Oct. 7, 6 a.m. to 8 p.m. at the Newtown Middle School.
Q4: Given the delay and projections, isn’t a redesign prudent?
This project is already at the state level for reimbursement after months of scrutiny from the state Bureau of School Facilities. This completed process entitles Newtown to a 31.43% reimbursement, and will be presented to the legislature for approval in the next legislative session. If we significantly redesign, we will have to pull that out of the state pipeline and resubmit a new plan by the June 30 deadline. However, because it is not reasonable to have the project redesigned and then pushed through the various state review processes by June 2009, a redesign will force Newtown to wait until June 2010 to submit completed and approved plans to the state. This obviously would cause a significant delay in the start of construction.
In addition, the architectural fees already paid may no longer be eligible for reimbursement, as they will not be tied to the approved project. Such a delay would also significantly weaken Newtown’s case for obtaining a waiver to the state’s new green building law, which if applied to this project could add 10% or more to the project cost. (See Q10 for more about green building law)
Secondly, there is no guarantee that a smaller project will come in any cheaper considering the escalation factors in this economic climate. Newtown could end up with a smaller addition that costs more.
Thirdly, this project has already been scaled back from the original request for $47 million. The components of this project, the classroom space, science labs, cafeteria, physical education space, etc., are all needed now for the current population, let only the needs for the increasing wave of student population that will begin entering the high school next September. To take more out of this project will only exacerbate the existing inadequate space issues at the high school.
Lastly, redesign will push this project out 18-24 months. The High School is already impacted by a population of more than 100 students beyond 100% capacity -- a number that doubles next year to 200 beyond 100% capacity -- and continues to grow through 2012.
Q5. In light of the high bids, why can’t Newtown just rebid all or portions of the project? When do the current bids expire?
The Board of Education and the Public Building & Site Commission thoroughly explored the option of re-bidding portions of the project. In two different public presentations to the Legislative Council and the Board of Selectmen, Bob Mitchell, an architect who sits on the Public Building & Site Commission, reported that four independent construction economists in the state of Connecticut predicted that re-bidding would result in higher bids due to the unpredictability of the economy, and the impact of global demand on construction materials. The instability in the construction materials marketplace, combined with bids that must take into account a 23-month project, has convinced these economists that future bids would most likely come in even higher.
In addition, the current bids expire Oct. 26. A rebid of the over-budget line items would require current in-line bidders to agree to extend their bids past this Oct. 26 bid expiration deadline. When asked about extending their bids, several bidders were unwilling to do this without an additional cost of about $400,000.
Thus, the risk, time delay, and additional cost of re-bidding makes this option not viable. Consider the consequences of a failed rebid:
· Newtown would be in the same, or worse position, but would have lost an additional 3-4 months.
· Our lowest bidders today, may chose not to participate in the rebid.
· Any delay in construction weakens Newtown’s case to obtain a waiver of compliance on the state’s new green building law. (see Q10 below for more info on this law)
Q6: How much of the overage was due to commodity prices? What were the figures used for copper, steel, oil, etc. vs. what they are today since commodity prices seem to be collapsing?
Most of the increase is due to the unprecedented increase in materials costs. From March to July of this year, steel prices rose 40% and fuel prices rose 78%. This overage is definitely a commodity problem, but there is little predictability in the commodities market, especially since it is a global market where high demand in other countries affects U.S. prices. We understand that this uncertainty affects the confidence of the bidders on this project who cannot get guaranteed prices from their suppliers. If commodities are decreasing, how will one know when is the ideal time and how long before it hits the building trades? The nature of dealing with an excessive population in the schools and the state reimbursement and bidding process do not allow us to sit and wait for the market to drop.
Q7: Why do we need a bigger gym, or why can’t we just delete the gym from this project to decrease costs?
Built for a high school with 1,000 students, the gym is educational space that is grossly inadequate. We now have 1,707 students at the high school, and this will grow to more than 1,800 by 2012. The gym is educational space. The state mandates physical education in the freshman, sophomore and junior year. We currently conduct five gym classes simultaneously throughout the day, forcing the school to use the weight room and “workout” room as educational space. Some health units of the physical education curriculum are taught on the gym bleachers, while other gym classes are being conducted on the gym floor.
The gym cannot be deleted from the current design without affecting the overall design because steel supports run throughout both the gym section and the new wing. Everything is integral. The roof design is economical, as well as functional. Functionally, the higher roof combined with the additional seating allows Newtown to host its fair share of sports tournaments, and other large community and regional events. The design of the roof also adds energy and acoustical efficiency to the building.
Q8: What efforts were made to contain the costs of this project throughout the planning process?
For the past 20 months, the Public Building & Site Commission has worked closely with of the project, and has been reducing costs. Value engineering was part of every decision, as were state mandates, safety codes, issues of long-term durability, and educational specifications. When the bids came back over budget, Public Building & Site, Superintendent Dr. Janet Robinson, and The Morganti Group once again looked at any value engineering that might help the cost.
Value engineering will continue to be a part of the process after construction begins. Once bids are signed, The Morganti Group then becomes “contractor at risk,” which means they guarantee the price will not increase. As contractor at risk, Morganti can work with signed bidders to try and reduce costs further.
Q9: How does the $469 per square foot cost on this project compare with other construction projects, and other school projects?
According to the state, school construction projects in Fairfield County usually cost $425-$500 a square foot. Unlike commercial office buildings, schools must adhere to many strict state and federal mandates, such as safety codes, accessibility codes, efficiency ratings. Each of these mandates adds to the cost. The need for school buildings to have a long-term durability also adds to the cost. A building that houses 1,800 teenagers daily, and is in use by the public and students every day and well into the evening must be built with materials that will withstand that type of public traffic.
Q10: How does the state’s new green building law affect this project today? If the referendum does not pass, how will the green building law affect Newtown?
The state's new green building law requires all public buildings approved by the legislature after January 1, 2009 to attain Silver LEEDs certification. School Superintendent Dr. Janet Robinson was made aware of this Sept. 15. Because the regulations for the law have yet to be approved by the legislature, the impact to Newtown are estimated to be an increase in cost of about 10%, according to Fletcher-Thompson, the project architect.
Dr. Robinson and members of the Board of Education contacted Sen. John McKinney and Sen. Julia Wasserman who began working on this issue immediately. Sen. McKinney spoke before the Legislative Council and the Board of Selectmen recently. First Selectman Joe Borst, with help from Sen. McKinney, has already submitted a waiver application to the state for the high school project. The waiver is based on how far along Newtown is in the planning process and the fact that the high school project has already been through an exhaustive three-month, detailed state review. Sen. McKinney said Newtown’s case was very strong. However, he said if the construction start is delayed, Newtown’s case for the waiver weakens. The longer the delay, the weaker Newtown’s case is.
Q11: Can the original completion date be met?
Based on an Oct. 7 referendum that receives a positive vote, the entire project will be completed by the end of 2010.
Q12: If the referendum passes, how will the school district handle this construction delay?
The six-month delay caused by the bidding process, coupled with the district’s largest class to date entering the high school in September 2009, requires a temporary solution of additional portables. Two sections of portables, consisting of eight classrooms, will be erected in the lower parking lot outside of the current cafeteria. In the short term, some of this lost parking space will be recouped near the stadium. If the additional appropriation is approved by the voters, the total cost of the additional portables is $650,000. It the appropriation is not approved and the portables are required for a longer period of time, the yearly cost is about $114,000. Aware of how this impacts the town’s capital improvement plan, the Board of Education voted to move all its existing capital projects back at least a year, so that the district’s number one priority – the high school expansion – could move forward. To resolve the issues in the CIP, the Board of Education, the Board of Finance, and the Board of Selectmen will have a joint meeting in the near future.
The portables are basic classroom space. They are not differentiated space that would allow for comprehensive science labs, additional cafeteria space, or physical education space. Existing hallways will remain crowded, and students will still be faced with scheduling problems that affect graduation credits. However, the portables will act as swing space while construction takes place.
Q13: Has the BOE considered a Plan B re-siting the grades among the existing school buildings?
There are no unfilled spaces throughout the Newtown Schools. In addition, it is educationally unsound to physically separate high school grades because so many students take upper-level classes as underclassmen.
If you have further questions, feel free to contact one of these Newtown Board of Education members:
Elaine McClure, ransommcclure@yahoo.com
Lillian Bittman, bittmanboe@aol.com
Kathryn Fetchick, kfetchick@charter.net
This free site and its links are supported by the Newtown Board of Education.
Additional supporters include: Sandy Hook School PTA; Head O'Meadow School PTA; Maureen Goeree, Middle Gate School PTA President; Mary Ann Jacob, Newtown Middle School PTA President; and Sarah Beier, Newtown High School PTA President.
Q1. What is the cost of this $6 million referendum to the taxpayer?
Bob Tait, Newtown’s finance director, has produced a chart that shows the estimated annual tax burden based on assessed house value. To see the entire tax impact document produced by Mr. Tait, and understand what your tax cost will be for the additional $6 million, click here.
Q2: What is the plan if the referendum does not pass? Is there a plan to cut $5M, $4M, $3M, $2M, etc.?
The project cannot be easily cut without significant redesign. With the exception of the track and field, the components are interconnected. Currently, the track is in disrepair. It is estimated that to replace it alone would cost $400,000. If the track and field were eliminated, that cost is $1.1 million, but the field costs would go up because that bid was based on doing both site work and the field. The next lowest field bid was $1.6 million. That being said, due diligence in trying to value engineer any savings has been ongoing. Every possible substitution of material has, or is, being analyzed to save costs. Since this expansion was designed to be as frugal as possible, there is little that can be scaled back.
If this project does not pass, the town will have to start the process over with a new design, resubmit plans to the state for approval, and will still have no guarantee that it will come in under $38 million – a process that will take 18-24 months. Meanwhile, the students at the High School are in overcrowded conditions even longer.
In addition, a redesign would severely weaken Newtown’s case for a waiver on the green buildings law, potentially adding 10% in cost to a redesign.
Q3: How did we get to this point where an additional referendum is needed?
In April the Newtown community overwhelmingly voiced their support for alleviating the existing overcrowded conditions at the High School by passing a referendum for a $38 million expansion. After considerable scrutiny by the Board of Education, Board of Finance, Legislative Council, Board of Selectmen, and Public Building & Site Commission this expansion has been determined to be the most viable solution to give our students the most effective learning environment. It also provides the diversified learning space needed to allow each student to take the classes they need to graduate and pursue the college major of their choice.
The need for the high school expansion project – with its diversified learning spaces --has not changed. The project, as originally presented to the voters last April, is still the best option. What has changed is the economy. Since March, steel prices have risen 40 percent, and petroleum has risen 78 percent, significantly impacting the bids Newtown received. This economic situation also forced bidders to increase their escalation costs for a project that spans 23 months.
On July 29 the bids were opened for this project and it was clear that the bid amounts were coming in over the projected $38 million. As the scope analysis was conducted, some of the lowest bidders were disqualified for significant reasons, and the second lowest bidder was then selected. This further increased the overage. Additionally, since this project is multi-year, projections that go into the second year have an additional escalation factor built into the bids. With the price for steel escalating to a record high, as have petroleum products, materials costs came in beyond estimates. Thus, this project currently stands $6,045,454 over the estimated $38 million. This figure does include those items that were bid alternates: The track and field, the lightning suppression, and interior ground face blocks.
The construction manager, architect, building and site committee members, and school district representatives agonized over items to value engineer to lower this overage. Every detail, even down to the material in the handrails, was analyzed for a less expensive option, but because this project had already been so thoroughly scrutinized, there was very little that could be taken from the project to capture enough savings to get the costs below the approved amount of $38 million. Thus, the Public Building and Site Commission, then followed by the Board of Education, the Legislative Council, and Board of Selectmen recommended that the Newtown High School expansion project be placed before the voters in a referendum for the additional $6,045,454.
The referendum vote will be Tuesday, Oct. 7, 6 a.m. to 8 p.m. at the Newtown Middle School.
Q4: Given the delay and projections, isn’t a redesign prudent?
This project is already at the state level for reimbursement after months of scrutiny from the state Bureau of School Facilities. This completed process entitles Newtown to a 31.43% reimbursement, and will be presented to the legislature for approval in the next legislative session. If we significantly redesign, we will have to pull that out of the state pipeline and resubmit a new plan by the June 30 deadline. However, because it is not reasonable to have the project redesigned and then pushed through the various state review processes by June 2009, a redesign will force Newtown to wait until June 2010 to submit completed and approved plans to the state. This obviously would cause a significant delay in the start of construction.
In addition, the architectural fees already paid may no longer be eligible for reimbursement, as they will not be tied to the approved project. Such a delay would also significantly weaken Newtown’s case for obtaining a waiver to the state’s new green building law, which if applied to this project could add 10% or more to the project cost. (See Q10 for more about green building law)
Secondly, there is no guarantee that a smaller project will come in any cheaper considering the escalation factors in this economic climate. Newtown could end up with a smaller addition that costs more.
Thirdly, this project has already been scaled back from the original request for $47 million. The components of this project, the classroom space, science labs, cafeteria, physical education space, etc., are all needed now for the current population, let only the needs for the increasing wave of student population that will begin entering the high school next September. To take more out of this project will only exacerbate the existing inadequate space issues at the high school.
Lastly, redesign will push this project out 18-24 months. The High School is already impacted by a population of more than 100 students beyond 100% capacity -- a number that doubles next year to 200 beyond 100% capacity -- and continues to grow through 2012.
Q5. In light of the high bids, why can’t Newtown just rebid all or portions of the project? When do the current bids expire?
The Board of Education and the Public Building & Site Commission thoroughly explored the option of re-bidding portions of the project. In two different public presentations to the Legislative Council and the Board of Selectmen, Bob Mitchell, an architect who sits on the Public Building & Site Commission, reported that four independent construction economists in the state of Connecticut predicted that re-bidding would result in higher bids due to the unpredictability of the economy, and the impact of global demand on construction materials. The instability in the construction materials marketplace, combined with bids that must take into account a 23-month project, has convinced these economists that future bids would most likely come in even higher.
In addition, the current bids expire Oct. 26. A rebid of the over-budget line items would require current in-line bidders to agree to extend their bids past this Oct. 26 bid expiration deadline. When asked about extending their bids, several bidders were unwilling to do this without an additional cost of about $400,000.
Thus, the risk, time delay, and additional cost of re-bidding makes this option not viable. Consider the consequences of a failed rebid:
· Newtown would be in the same, or worse position, but would have lost an additional 3-4 months.
· Our lowest bidders today, may chose not to participate in the rebid.
· Any delay in construction weakens Newtown’s case to obtain a waiver of compliance on the state’s new green building law. (see Q10 below for more info on this law)
Q6: How much of the overage was due to commodity prices? What were the figures used for copper, steel, oil, etc. vs. what they are today since commodity prices seem to be collapsing?
Most of the increase is due to the unprecedented increase in materials costs. From March to July of this year, steel prices rose 40% and fuel prices rose 78%. This overage is definitely a commodity problem, but there is little predictability in the commodities market, especially since it is a global market where high demand in other countries affects U.S. prices. We understand that this uncertainty affects the confidence of the bidders on this project who cannot get guaranteed prices from their suppliers. If commodities are decreasing, how will one know when is the ideal time and how long before it hits the building trades? The nature of dealing with an excessive population in the schools and the state reimbursement and bidding process do not allow us to sit and wait for the market to drop.
Q7: Why do we need a bigger gym, or why can’t we just delete the gym from this project to decrease costs?
Built for a high school with 1,000 students, the gym is educational space that is grossly inadequate. We now have 1,707 students at the high school, and this will grow to more than 1,800 by 2012. The gym is educational space. The state mandates physical education in the freshman, sophomore and junior year. We currently conduct five gym classes simultaneously throughout the day, forcing the school to use the weight room and “workout” room as educational space. Some health units of the physical education curriculum are taught on the gym bleachers, while other gym classes are being conducted on the gym floor.
The gym cannot be deleted from the current design without affecting the overall design because steel supports run throughout both the gym section and the new wing. Everything is integral. The roof design is economical, as well as functional. Functionally, the higher roof combined with the additional seating allows Newtown to host its fair share of sports tournaments, and other large community and regional events. The design of the roof also adds energy and acoustical efficiency to the building.
Q8: What efforts were made to contain the costs of this project throughout the planning process?
For the past 20 months, the Public Building & Site Commission has worked closely with of the project, and has been reducing costs. Value engineering was part of every decision, as were state mandates, safety codes, issues of long-term durability, and educational specifications. When the bids came back over budget, Public Building & Site, Superintendent Dr. Janet Robinson, and The Morganti Group once again looked at any value engineering that might help the cost.
Value engineering will continue to be a part of the process after construction begins. Once bids are signed, The Morganti Group then becomes “contractor at risk,” which means they guarantee the price will not increase. As contractor at risk, Morganti can work with signed bidders to try and reduce costs further.
Q9: How does the $469 per square foot cost on this project compare with other construction projects, and other school projects?
According to the state, school construction projects in Fairfield County usually cost $425-$500 a square foot. Unlike commercial office buildings, schools must adhere to many strict state and federal mandates, such as safety codes, accessibility codes, efficiency ratings. Each of these mandates adds to the cost. The need for school buildings to have a long-term durability also adds to the cost. A building that houses 1,800 teenagers daily, and is in use by the public and students every day and well into the evening must be built with materials that will withstand that type of public traffic.
Q10: How does the state’s new green building law affect this project today? If the referendum does not pass, how will the green building law affect Newtown?
The state's new green building law requires all public buildings approved by the legislature after January 1, 2009 to attain Silver LEEDs certification. School Superintendent Dr. Janet Robinson was made aware of this Sept. 15. Because the regulations for the law have yet to be approved by the legislature, the impact to Newtown are estimated to be an increase in cost of about 10%, according to Fletcher-Thompson, the project architect.
Dr. Robinson and members of the Board of Education contacted Sen. John McKinney and Sen. Julia Wasserman who began working on this issue immediately. Sen. McKinney spoke before the Legislative Council and the Board of Selectmen recently. First Selectman Joe Borst, with help from Sen. McKinney, has already submitted a waiver application to the state for the high school project. The waiver is based on how far along Newtown is in the planning process and the fact that the high school project has already been through an exhaustive three-month, detailed state review. Sen. McKinney said Newtown’s case was very strong. However, he said if the construction start is delayed, Newtown’s case for the waiver weakens. The longer the delay, the weaker Newtown’s case is.
Q11: Can the original completion date be met?
Based on an Oct. 7 referendum that receives a positive vote, the entire project will be completed by the end of 2010.
Q12: If the referendum passes, how will the school district handle this construction delay?
The six-month delay caused by the bidding process, coupled with the district’s largest class to date entering the high school in September 2009, requires a temporary solution of additional portables. Two sections of portables, consisting of eight classrooms, will be erected in the lower parking lot outside of the current cafeteria. In the short term, some of this lost parking space will be recouped near the stadium. If the additional appropriation is approved by the voters, the total cost of the additional portables is $650,000. It the appropriation is not approved and the portables are required for a longer period of time, the yearly cost is about $114,000. Aware of how this impacts the town’s capital improvement plan, the Board of Education voted to move all its existing capital projects back at least a year, so that the district’s number one priority – the high school expansion – could move forward. To resolve the issues in the CIP, the Board of Education, the Board of Finance, and the Board of Selectmen will have a joint meeting in the near future.
The portables are basic classroom space. They are not differentiated space that would allow for comprehensive science labs, additional cafeteria space, or physical education space. Existing hallways will remain crowded, and students will still be faced with scheduling problems that affect graduation credits. However, the portables will act as swing space while construction takes place.
Q13: Has the BOE considered a Plan B re-siting the grades among the existing school buildings?
There are no unfilled spaces throughout the Newtown Schools. In addition, it is educationally unsound to physically separate high school grades because so many students take upper-level classes as underclassmen.
If you have further questions, feel free to contact one of these Newtown Board of Education members:
Elaine McClure, ransommcclure@yahoo.com
Lillian Bittman, bittmanboe@aol.com
Kathryn Fetchick, kfetchick@charter.net
This free site and its links are supported by the Newtown Board of Education.
Additional supporters include: Sandy Hook School PTA; Head O'Meadow School PTA; Maureen Goeree, Middle Gate School PTA President; Mary Ann Jacob, Newtown Middle School PTA President; and Sarah Beier, Newtown High School PTA President.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)