Selectmen Approve Funds For

High School Expansion Rebid

By Kendra Bobowick

Support was not unanimous at Monday’s Board of Selectmen’s meeting, but a 2-1 vote approved expending $209,500 to cover rebidding the proposed high school expansion project. First Selectman Joe Borst and Selectman Paul Mangiafico gave the proposal a nod. But Selectman Herb Rosenthal, who said he supports the expansion, was wary of the rebid proposals.

Mr Rosenthal asked if rebidding will “get us where we need to be,” and said after the meeting, “...if not, we’re wasting time and money.”

The proposals being prepared by Fletcher Thompson and the Morganti Group consist of nearly 30 reconfigured bid packages, up from the original dozen which encompassed much broader specifications for bidders during the first round of estimates solicited last June.

Rebidding must come back at or under the $38.8 million already approved by taxpayers for the construction phase of the project. But the additional costs for rebidding are coming from a $355,000 balance of money already bonded for the design phase of the project.

Earlier this year bids for the $38.8 million budgeted project came in at $6.045 million more than the amount approved by taxpayers in an April 2008 referendum. At a subsequent referendum for a special appropriation to cover the extra costs, voters turned down a request for the additional funds.

This time, however, Schools Superintendent Janet Robinson and Board of Education Chairman Elaine McClure detailed a rebid plan they hope will work.

After meetings with the Morganti Group and Joe Costa from Fletcher Thompson, Dr Robinson explained a strategy that opens bidding to nearly three times as many contractors. “We went through the changes we would make. We hope it will bring in lower bids.”

Their fingers remain crossed.

“We hope the rebid brings us results below the $38 million,” Dr Robinson explained.

First Selectman Joe Borst then asked, “When does [Mr Costa] expect the package to be ready?” With a quick glance at their paperwork, the superintendent and Board of Education chairman agreed that the project could go in February.

Selectmen Paul Mangiafico and Herb Rosenthal both like the idea of additional bid packages.

“Rather than bidding on a larger project they can’t handle,” Mr Mangiafico began, contractors may be able to grasp something smaller, he concluded. “That’s great.”

Mr Rosenthal also feels the Board of Education is making a prudent move by splitting the bid packages.

“I think they’ll get some savings,” he said the following day. But will they save the $6 million overrun in the original bidding?

Mr Rosenthal agreed that smaller packages are within reach of more small contractors. And smaller companies looking for work might be able to apply better rates to smaller parts of the project, he noted.

After the meeting, Mr Rosenthal explained, “I don’t like the way it’s handled; are they really going to save at the rebid?”

He clarified at the time of the vote that he was not against the expansion, but is frustrated with providing more money to architects who miscalculated estimates the first time when the bids came back $6 million over budget.

He had also sought reassurances that rebidding would “get us where we need to be at the $38 million.”

Factoring in are several new “alternates” or optional pieces of the project that the Board of Education has separated out, which were originally endorsed by voters as being built-in elements of the overall project. Pushing Ms McClure for a clear answer Monday, Mr Mangiafico asked about one alternate specifically — driveway relocation.

State Department of Transportation plans to reconfigure the Exit 11 ramp system in a way that is incompatible with the current configuration of the high school’s driveway.

Mr Mangiafico pressed, “Can we expand the high school without the driveway [relocation]?”

Grudgingly, Ms McClure said: “Yes. If the state traffic commission agrees.” In ensuing conversation it was suggested that the state ought to pay for the driveway relocation.

Insisting on another answer, Mr Mangiafico asked, “Would you be willing to strip out the driveway [from the expansion plans]?” Ms McClure replied, “The state is asking us to move it; we’ll ask them if it can wait.”

Regarding alternates in general, he asked the Board of Education chairman, “Will you strip alternates from the project to the degree necessary.” Possibly, item by item, the alternates can be shifted to the school board’s capital improvement requests or budget, but Ms McClure indicated that the board had not discussed it. School District Business Manager Ron Bienkowski also indicated the possibilities of addressing the alternates in other ways.

The three selectmen, as well as finance board and council officials, have said they do not want to see additional funding requests for alternates turning up as expansion commences.

In a separate conversation, Mr Rosenthal was stern: “I don’t want them to pull something out and get to $38 million and then come back with it later; that’s not really coming down.” Overall, he is not comfortable with the expansion plans.

In a 6 to 1 vote December 2, the school board agreed to move forward with rebidding the project with the addition of value management modifications, and breaking out the synthetic track, synthetic field, tennis courts, gym basement storage, lightening protection, painted block surfacing, the main entry realignment, and parking areas as alternates.