Would a prospective homebuyer, looking at plans for the new home
under construction, tell the contractor to go ahead as planned,
when previous bids have come in higher than anticipated? The buyer
will want to know the cost of additions that include the den,
fourth bedroom and kitchen cabinets before giving the go-ahead.
Would a prospective homebuyer, looking at plans for the new home under construction, tell the contractor to go ahead as planned, when previous bids have come in higher than anticipated? The buyer will want to know the cost of additions that include the den, fourth bedroom and kitchen cabinets before giving the go-ahead.
Perhaps, some might say, because construction has already begun, as in the case of Sobrato High School. The School Board voted last Tuesday to wait to award eight bids totaling approximately $26 million until the next bid package comes in in two weeks.
Apparently the delay in awarding the bids will delay the overall project at least four weeks, making it next to impossible to be ready for the opening date of August 2004.
Trustees should look at a more realistic opening date – possibly August 2005 – in order to avoid Barrett-type mistakes.
Some trustees and some in the School District are disappointed, with worries about more delays and how that will affect students, staff who are going to open the new school and what to do if faced with the decision of opening mid-year.
But the entire project has been plagued with delays. A good reason, some say, not to add another. But will the two weeks really push the project back so far? The projected opening date is already only 13 months away, so is August 2004 really a reasonable expectation?
Trustees Jan Masuda, Amina Khemici, Mike Hickey and Shellé Thomas obviously paid heed to the report on the cost overruns in building Barrett Elementary which cautioned against haste. The $18,000 report prepared by Saylor Consulting listed the aggressive timetable as one of the reasons the school cost approximately 23 percent more than the average elementary school, even allowing for extras such as Barrett’s oversized multi-purpose room.
It isn’t likely, even if the board had approved awarding the eight bids last week that the school could open on time. It makes sense to exercise prudence and do it right this time.
As they push for fiscal responsibility and accountability, trustees should not forget the academic side of the equation. With two high schools and a declining enrollment, will certain programs have to be limited to one school or the other? Who is making these kinds of decisions, including having Live Oak coaches vote on an athletic director for a far-from completed school? Are athletics being given priority over academics?
Naturally, Sobrato – even as a hole in the ground – needed Rich Knapp to come over as principal, so he could be focused on all aspects of the new school and Nancy Serigstad on leading Live Oak, but it seems a bit premature to be deciding on an athletic director already. The administration and board need to spend some more time on this decision as well.
Contact trustees via the district’s website, www.mhu.k12.ca.us, or by leaving a phone message at the District Office, 201-6000. Superintendent Carolyn McKennan can be reached at 201-6000.
