13 more change orders on this Monday's agenda:
Change Orders for High School Renovation Project – This month’s list of change orders proposes 13 changes for Board consideration. They are as follows:
a. EL-09-36 to Farfield for $7,718 to add power to elevator sump pumps in Buildings H and G,
b. PL-04-37 to Vrabel for $6,100 to add sump pumps in elevator shafts in Buildings H and G,
c. GC-22-43 to Nello for $6,537 to add chase walls in athletic building restrooms for plumbing rough in,
d. EL-10-44 to Farfield for a credit of ($49,987) to change CAT 6 to CAT 5e at IT department’s request,
e. GC-23-45 to Nello for $5,105 for wood furring at 6th floor window jambs,
f. GC-24-46 to Nello for $4,984 to add supports to existing compromised plaster bulkheads,
g. GC-25-47 to Nello for $15,461 to laminate corridor side of classrooms in B building,
h. GC-26-48 to Nello for $3,786 to provide floor infill for a chase in B-building near restroom B610,
i. EL-11-49 to Farfield for $3,929 to modify light fixtures in room D108,
j. EL-12-50 to Farfield for a credit of ($7,774) to eliminate a light fixture in Room D108,
k. ME-03-51 to McKamish for $23,192 to demolish and replace ductwork in conflict with elevator in F-building,,
l. FP-02-52 to Simplex Grinnell for $1,581 to provide 6 sprinkler heads to create water curtain around glass at library entrance, and
m. EL-13-53 to Farfield for $17,351 to provide raceway between server room in F building through new athletic building for MLSD to replace fiber and phone feed to football field.
With Remely now a declared candidate for State Rep, we'll see him rant and rave about the change orders in the name of taxpayer concerns, and then acquiesce and vote yea at roll calls.
ReplyDeleteSomeone should ask him, if elected, what he would do about getting our school bond reimbursement payments from Harrisburg that have been frozen for months. Not receiving the payments is resulting in millage pressures and even increases. But when the delinquent payments finally come in, there will not be any any millage adjustments or reductions. Those will have been locked in, and such reimbursement payments will flow to the bottom line as general fund "surplus".
Don't count on Remely for much of anything, in my opinion.
ReplyDeleteAnyone remember this excerpt from the story on the first HS project bids?
"Mt. Lebanon school board wants reasons for high bids By Kaitlynn Riely / Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Mt. Lebanon resident Bill Matthews described Monday night's school board meeting as the "most somber" one he'd ever seen.
School Director Dan Remely told him that he may need to get a thesaurus to elaborate on the mood.
"I'm more than somber," he said.
There was anger, frustration and confusion as school board members tried to figure out why bids came in 16.5 percent higher than expected for their planned $113.2 million high school renovation."
Did Dan or any other board members give a concise reason why the bids were so high? Any reason why they got it so wrong?
Anyone fail to meet expectations when it came to handing out raises????
And now we're into change orders. Yeah sure Dan's really, really angry now that no one looked under the fine arts lobby carpet.
Give us a break Dan! Could you please just nod off for the rest of your term.
I updated the change order list. We're at $1.125 million now. Still no list on the District website.
ReplyDeleteRemember this on Lebo Citizens January 22, 2013?
"Dan spoke of a detailed list that will be on the School District website. When he questioned the availability of that list, President Cappucci replied that the list has not been developed. So I guess we are just stuck with a list of numbers."
Still stuck with a list of numbers.
Elaine
What we are stuck with is the bill for this boondoggle!
ReplyDeleteNow isn't this an interesting perspective from an article in the Post Gazette.
ReplyDelete"Penn State's financial pinch hits all sports teams"
"The proposed renovations in 2011 would have brought a 50-meter pool with eight lanes, three diving platforms, including a 10-meter platform, and room for spectators. Now, the pool measures 25 meters and has six lanes. There is no diving platform."
"Men's and women's swimming coach John Hargis said facilities were a major selling point for recruiting top talent. The men's and women's swimming teams consistently have finished in the top 25 most seasons and are ranked in the top 25 this year despite the disadvantages."
Here's little old Penn State, a world renown university with a student population nearly equal to that of the total population of Mt. Lebanon and they manage to muddle thru with a 6 lane, 25 meter indoor pool.
Applying the logic that our wonderful school board used on us, you have to wonder why anyone would want to go to school there!
Go right ahead, Cappucci, Remely, Kubit, Ostergard, Lebowitz, Birks, Cooper, Goldman and Posti, keep spending like there's no tomorrow.
Maybe the reason Penn State had to make due with a 6 lane, 25 meter pool is because they are spending
ReplyDelete$90 million on the new hockey arena.
"In 2011, Penn State approved plans to renovate McCoy Natatorium and to build a new indoor tennis center on campus. Last fall, the project was suspended indefinitely, in part because the athletic department had to withdraw funding.
ReplyDeleteThe money for the natatorium, as well as the tennis center, was to come from three sources: $30 million from student activity fees (the swimming facility would have been open for student use), $25 million from the athletic department and $10 million from donations."
So Penn State is spending $65,000,000 to build a swimming pool that is one lane wider and three feet longer than MLSD's old pool and only $10,000,000 came from donations while the $55,000,000 came from student activity fees and the athletic department.
ReplyDeleteHoly Cow! What else are parents paying for to send their kids to Penn State? Is PSU really worth the state taxes we are sending there?
Penn State is ranked #46 in the country according to U.S. News and World Report Best Colleges 2013 Top National Universities. State appropriations account for 14% of the 2012-13 budget of 4.3 billion. Athletics is self-funded. The hockey arena is being funded by a donation of $88 million from Terry and Kim Pegula and will be named the Pegula Ice Arena. The donation is to fund the arena and establish an NCAA Division 1 men's and women's hockey program.
ReplyDeleteSeeing no other place to ask this, this seems to be the place.
ReplyDeleteWatching the board discussion on the HS rifle range Mr. Lebowitzbrought up an interesting idea.
Could a rifle range be a profit generator for the district.
Not having any idea of specifics a suggestions.
There is opportunity to shoot .22 cal pistols at the police range, I believe, though I don't know where the range is located.
Would it be possible to expand this site in conjunction with the municipality, open it for our school, USC and the general public for gun safety courses and resident use and competition? Fees would be charged of course.
This would move the guns out of the school which concerns some residents.
Boy would I like to take advantage of the Cancer Shooting event open to the teachers, too.
"The Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU) has released its 2012 ranking of the top 100 world-class universities and has ranked Penn State at No. 49. Penn State is one of 53 highest-ranking institutions in the United States, 30 in Europe and 17 among Japan, Israel, Canada and Australia. Penn State is one of five Big Ten universities and one of only two Pennsylvania schools to make the top 50."
ReplyDeleteMany of us benefit from the research and workforce development coming out of Penn State. I'd say it is a terrific ROI whether tax dollars, donors or parents are paying the bills!
The point is being missed here.
ReplyDeleteIt is not that PSU is a great, good or bad university.
It is that the school with a huge student body manage to get by with an indoor pool for the swim team and students not much bigger than our old HS pool.
The swim team manages to rank in the top 25 in a "substandard" pool.
I'll bet the proposed PSU natatorium is a drop in the bucket compared to the academic facilities investments made that make it a world class higher educational institution.
It would be interesting to break out the cost of our athletic facility in relation to academic spaces being renovated or built.
Then make the comparison to similar spending at Penn State.
Plus you would need to factor in what PSU football brings in money and prestige wise.
I doubt Lebo football has anywhere near the same positive impact on the district budget or reputation! Though there is a select group of people that try to argue that it does.
Understood, 11:17, but the response was to 10:46's statement: "Is PSU really worth the state taxes we are sending there?"
ReplyDeleteThe point is really being missed here. This is about change orders which will be approved at Monday's meeting.
ReplyDeleteElaine
Regarding the specific change orders listed, yes we are off topic.
ReplyDeleteBut overall there have been a number of change orders in the athletic wing.
We have the tennis courts, which had a couple of design changes between the time of the original bid and the deduct alternatives. Which at this point we 're not even sure they might be delayed and moved to capital improvements to stay unde the referendum limits.
So yes, we should be still questioning why elevator sump pumps weren't in the original bid, but we need to keep the big picture in focus as well.
http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/local/breaking/some-mt-lebanon-residents-ask-for-new-high-school-329336/
ReplyDelete"School directors Elaine Cappucci, a chairwoman of the board's renovation/construction committee, and Josephine Posti said that voting for either alternative at this point would in essence be voting for a referendum.
However, they said, it appeared that costs of the alternatives are being adjusted and perhaps the price of one of the alternatives could become low enough to avoid a referendum."
Hmmmm, low enough to avoid a referendum. Strange goal don't you think?
Not-- adjust the plan to build the best high school for the least amount of money.
Not-- make the project affordable so we don't have to make curriculum or staff cuts. Adjust so taxes don't go through the roof. No, their goal was to avoid referendum!
Well, Mrs. Cappucci and Mrs. Posti certainly did what they set out to do, they avoided the referendum. Got to give them credit for that, right?
The question today is did they "adjust" the plan just enough to avoid a referendum and are now 'adjusting' the project back up with change orders?
11:41 Good question, but the little known secret is that the referendum has always been the budget even though the directors have denied the fact on many occasions.
ReplyDeleteI'm not so sure beating the referendum limit was the goal initially. This blast from the past suggest otherwise, but I do agree when it was discovered they didn't have carte blanche, getting under the referendum was the goal.
ReplyDeletehttp://bloglebo.blogspot.com/2009/02/some-mt-lebanon-residents-ask-for-new.html?m=1
I wonder what the "Build Our School Now" members have to say now that the board is discussing program cuts, not replacing staff and revisiting eliminating a school?
Do they still think a $150 million new high school was the answer.
Wonder if Mr. Gardner (wasn't he a BOSN leader?) still thinks he was right. Wonder if he or others in the group have had a change a change of hart?
Just curious, any of you BOSNs still think you were right pushing the $150 million plan, and 4,000 of your neighbors were wrong?
From the PG article here are two we could ask.
"Build Our School Now representatives, including Kristin Linfante and David Brumfield, pledged to the board that they would knock on doors in the community lobbying people to approve the referendum."
That old expression comes to mind: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."
2:15 You are not sure that the referendum limit was the initial goal, but that was stated long ago by Alan Silhol and Tom Peterson wrote the minutes. Alan said something along the lines that "the referendum has always been the budget..." It's in the files.
ReplyDeleteThen what was the entirely new $150 million high school plan that the BOSn people wanted about?
ReplyDeleteRemember we were given 4 options from the DeJong sessions. Out of which a plan was developed that would have cost around $130 million and bold B was to be a stand alone administration building. Think back-- that was when Celli told us it couldn't be renovated to 21st century education standards.
Bldg B not bold B.
ReplyDeleteGee 3 years and almost 24 hours since directly asked and the usually verbose Commissioner Linfante has no comment as to whether her position to build a $150 million HS was a good one in hind sight.
ReplyDeleteC'mon guys, Brumfield, Gardner... you and your BOSN pals had a lot to say about the project and your neighbors over the years. Why the silent treatment now?
m. EL-13-53 to Farfield for $17,351 to provide raceway between server room in F building through new athletic building for MLSD to replace fiber and phone feed to football field.
ReplyDeleteGeez, we can't make a wifi connection from across Horsman?
For $200/month Comcast tells me I can control the lights, heat, AC, locks, appliances from anywhere in the country from my iPhone.
We need to spend over $17,000 to talk to to the football field.
As far as a phone connection. Maybe Posti can get us a deal on some Motorola Walkabouts. That way we could have instantaneous voice contact ANYWHERE on the high school property for a few hundred bucks.
k. ME-03-51 to McKamish for $23,192 to demolish and replace ductwork in conflict with elevator in F-building
ReplyDeleteThis cost should be recoverable from the construction manager or the designer, or whoever made the mistake in the first place.
Or reimbursed by Celli, 9:09.
ReplyDeleteYou design a building and you don't know the existing ductwork goes through your new elevator shaft? Really?
Who designed this project, Wylie Coyote?
Must have been designed by the same person that forgot the sump pumps!