Board discusses trimming of building budget

by Dave DeMars

news@thenewsleaders.com

The need to trim the building budget and bring the new high school in on budget was the primary topic of discussion at the Feb. 9 Sartell-St. Stephen School Board workshop.

Superintendent Jeff Schwiebert listed five areas where savings can be found either through elimination of selected items, finding less-expensive options and materials, or deferral of acquisition until a later date.

A short history

Schwiebert began by pointing out the referendum total approved was $105.8 million, and $89.5 million of that was for the construction of the new high school with the rest being used to accomplish maintenance and upgrades on other buildings in the district.

Through “value engineering,” some savings have already been realized. Movement of HVAC (heating, ventilation and air conditioning) units to the roof and outside the building footprint provided some savings because it saves space in the building and it runs more efficiently since air intake and exhaust are accomplished more easily.

Another engineering change that was made was a change to the roof which had been pitched. By eliminating the pitch and going to a conventional flat roof, there was a savings in materials, (steel, glass, concrete and more) since the roof did not have to be as high.

At present the building is about 1 percent over budget (about $1.2 million.) Schwiebert added there is still trimming that can and will be done.

Proposed trimming

Throughout this portion of the workshop, Schwiebert emphasized these reductions were premature and tentative, and that as the building progresses, other savings might be realized that could eliminate the need for any of the suggestions that would be put forth that evening.

“We are doing our due diligence about how we can get some of those numbers down some more,” Schwiebert said.

Two of the first things proposed for trimming were the black-box lighting and the theater equipment. Schwiebert said the infrastructure could be put in place, but it may not be possible to put everything in the black box in terms of the lighting, nor to provide all the theater equipment desired. Choices will need to be made as to what is absolutely necessary and what are nice-to-have items, Schwiebert said.

‘We can give Schuler and Shook, our consultants, a list of equipment that won’t absolutely be needed, and here is an alternative price, and when we get the bids, we can decide whether to accept them or not,” Schwiebert said.

Next on the trim list was a culinary lab. Two were priced since the amount of space was available. Cost of equipment to equip one room for the program was $161,000. While the space was available, Schwiebert said at present the district does not have a culinary-arts program – only something similar to it.

“It is something some day we would like to have,” Schwiebert said.

One board member suggested maybe a grocery-store company would want to sponsor the culinary-arts program. Schwiebert maintained it’s important to have the basic programs covered and equipped and then he would enjoy having a conversation about getting some of the nice-to-have programs.

A third area up for examination was the food-service area. The question posed was whether everything proposed for the kitchen area was necessary. The food-service director is still working with the consultants, Schwiebert said. They are early in their planning stages, and there is a small positive balance in the food-service budget that could be helpful in this area.

Another area that does not directly affect the program and student services was outside the building and involved the construction of a concession stand-restrooms building and dugouts in some of the activity areas outside.

“We don’t have to have the concession stand and restroom area in the practice areas,” Schwiebert said. “We have lived for years with portable outhouses if we still need them.“

The last area that is actually a part of the physical-education program is the construction of four tennis courts. Schwiebert said the program would suffer if the tennis courts were not built. While the after-school sports program would be able to travel to nearby courts for practice and competition, it would be highly inconvenient to do so during the course of an academic day. So not building the courts would necessitate changes in the physical-education program. Elimination of the courts would save under $300,000.

“These are choices I hope we don’t have to make, Schwiebert said, “but we either find ways to alternatively fund these or we have the bids come in better than what we are thinking.”

Schwiebert said there is a disparity between the figures he’s working with and those of the architect. His estimate is the building program is 2,200 feet larger than originally proposed by the architect. This difference in calculations is something that will need to be adjusted as the program moves forward. Some contingencies are built in to the estimates because the estimation process is not totally accurate and there are always cost adjustments.

Schwiebert also said there will be three bidding stages. Recently he has been in touch with Willie Jett, the superintendent of the St. Cloud School District, to determine if there are ways the two districts could work together to realize some cost savings in their building programs. Since both districts are working with the same consultants, it was thought this was a possibility. For example, if both districts were ordering 100 flat screen TVs, combining the order into one larger order and shopping the bid in that manner would produce a savings. This could be done in any number of bids from chairs and tables and other materials, especially in the technology area.

The specifics of such a partnership would need to be worked out, but the savings would make it worth the effort to do so. The St. Cloud building program is about two months behind Sartell, so there would need to be some coordination of effort and bids, but Schwiebert said he’s optimistic something can be worked out, and that would produce a savings for both districts.

The differential in building schedules makes it possible for contractors to put together bids for both programs using numbers from one bid to complete the second bid since some of the building materials would be similar.

Schwiebert noted there is still some built-in flexibility because the bid for fixtures and equipment, things such as tables and chairs, won’t be let until near the end of the building program in 2019. The original estimate was for replacement of all of the fixtures and equipment. If there are cost over-runs at that point, some trimming could be done using serviceable equipment the district already has rather than replacing everything completely. It’s not something Schwiebert said he favors, but it’s an option.

“I want the structure and the organizational pieces so we can teach the way we need to teach – the furniture will help us greatly in that, but it’s not absolutely essential,” Schwiebert said. “I don’t want this to happen, but if I have to save $500,000 because I’m going to re-use the lunch-room tables that we currently have, that’s something we will do at that point.”

Schwiebert said the building program is designed to allow for more space for students, and while there may be some minimal student population growth, there is no huge influx expected. Thus, there will not be a need for a lot of additional new items like tables and chairs and room fixtures. While new furnishings have been factored into the plan, if there are cost over-runs, that’s one place where adjustments can be made.

Attention shifted briefly to providing parking for students during the day, for special events like graduation and the problem of snow removal. An additional 300 parking spaces will be added bringing the parking to 800 spaces.

For a brief time there was discussion of the 42 acres the district owns in St. Stephen. The property may be too expensive to develop as a school site. There was preliminary consideration of whether the property might best serve the district if it were sold. Schwiebert said there has been some interest but added potential buyers were looking for a deal. The selling price will probably be in the $5,000 to $10,000-per-acre bracket. Schwiebert will gather more information before a disposition can be made. There may be other valuable programs for which the land can be used.

Schwiebert also told the board large energy rebates are no longer as available as they once were because much of the things rebated are now required by code. Those things are no longer optional. The district is hoping for about $300,000 in rebates from energy savings over 25 years.

The final portion of the workshop was devoted to realigning the organizational chart for staffing and chain of command so employees and constituents could know what the chain of responsibility and supervision is.