JOINT BOARD OF SUPERVISORS/SCHOOL BOARD MEETING
SECONDARY SCHOOL PROJECT
Thursday, September 27, 2001

All Supervisors present except Mr. Bruguiere.

     Mr. Wood opened the meeting by explaining that the purpose of the
meeting was determine how to deal with the $3 million shortfall on the
School Project.  He noted that in addition to the $3 million shortfall,
there was also the matter of the bus garage parking area project that was
not included in the bids.  He asked the staff from Ballou Justice Upton
Architects if there were ways to cut costs without lowering the quality or
the square footage on the project.  Staff with Ballou Justice said that the
low bid had come in from Branch & Associates, Inc.  The base bid was for
renovation to the high school, an addition to the high school and a new
attached middle school with a 1240-seat gym.  They listed 3 Add/Alternates:
  1)new high school weight/locker room
  2)high school auditorium interior 
  3)new roof on the existing high school.

     The low bid came in at $20,174,000 including the 3 Add/Alternates.  In
addition, there is a 3.5% Contingency Fund and $3,066,830 Associated
Project Costs (which includes construction testing, computers, furniture
and professional fees).  These items brought the project cost to
$23,946,920.  The funds available for the project are $20,889,912 leaving a
shortfall of $3,057,008.  The architects presented the Boards with a list
of things that could possibly reduce the base bid amount noting that some
would reduce the quality and others would not.  The list included items
such as deleting the window blinds and locker repairs, changing or deleting
some of the food service equipment, regrading the site to balance excess
soil.  If all of the items were deleted, the savings would be approximately
$554,000 or more.

     Mr. Wood asked why the bids had come in so much higher than the
projected costs in the architect’s own study.  Justice Ballou staff said
that the construction costs had come in 6% higher than anticipated.  They
noted that they had used optimistic square foot figures and that the
schools were not typical – citing the middle school designed with a full-
blown gym and the larger than average vocational program at the high
school.  Their staff explained that the buildings were designed
specifically for Nelson County’s needs.  Mr. Harvey asked if that wasn’t
anticipated from the beginning.  He also said that from the beginning the
firm had worked to develop an estimate for the project and he asked what
had been changed or increased to change that estimate.  Mr. Wood said that
the Board wants to see a quality school and that they knew it would be
expensive.  He said that they had the firm do a study, sat down and figured
out how to do the entire project based on that study.  Mr. Wood expressed
frustration that now, two years later, the county finds that it’s no good
and the money is very short. 

     Mr. Worley, Superintendent of Schools, said that the square footage
had gone up since the beginning of the project – estimating an increase of
10,000 square feet.  Ballou Justice staff said that the simplest answer was
that $110/sq ft was the goal and that they just couldn’t do it for that. 
Their staff said that the initial study indicated a cost of $26 million and
that they then had to come back to make it work for the money the county
actually had for the project.  Mr. Worley then noted that the initial study
used only state recommendations and they had not, at that point, actually
interviewed the school staff to determine actual needs.

     Mr. Wood said that the Board believed the numbers they were given and
that now they can’t make it work for that.  He said that the county now had
to tell the public.  He said he realized that a 10,000 sq ft increase was a
lot but that it would have been nice to know that along the way instead of
now at the end.  Mr. Wood said they had to find a way to make the project
work.  He asked if there was any way to cut the Associated Costs?  He said
that the architects were paid a percentage and asked why that couldn’t be
cut.  He suggested they could be paid to the percentage of the budgeted
amount rather than the project amount.  Ballou Justice staff responded that
it might look like a windfall for their firm, but that a shortfall actually
ends up costing them a great deal in extra work.  Mr. Harris asked if the
architectural and engineering fees are the same as in the beginning and
whether they would go up.  Their staff answered that the fees are the same
but that they couldn’t say whether they would go up.  Mr. Worley said he
would work with the firm to get a set fee. 

     Mr. Worley asked how the Board wanted the Steering Committee to
proceed and noted that they would like to begin work on things that could
be cut.  Mr. Wood said that they should go ahead with that and present
their recommendations to the Steering Committee.  He noted that the Board
would have to discuss options for funding and would hopefully have a final
decision by their October 9 meeting.  Mr. Carter asked for clear direction
on the three Add/Alternates.  The Board agreed that all three were to
remain in the project and Mr. Wood directed the Committee to put the bus
garage parking area back into the final budget.  Mr. Wood also directed the
Committee to work with the contractor to find ways to save money without
giving up quality and suggested that they set a half million as their
goal.  Mr. Harvey said that when the project was finished, the Board wanted
to be done with it – they didn’t want to come back and have to add things
or wish they had done it differently.  He noted that the county would not
back out on the project, but that other real county needs would suffer. 
Mr. Carter asked that information be developed on cost savings as quickly
as possible to allow the Board to make a decision at their October 9
meeting.  Mr. Wood asked that the Board be provided with a true final
budget at that time.  Mr. Harris also reminded the Committee that they had
agreed to encourage the use of local contractors and subcontractors
whenever possible in the project.

     After the School Board had adjourned their meeting, the Board met with
Mr. Roland Kooch with Davenport & Company to discuss possible options for
the additional funding.  Working with a $2.5 million shortfall figure, Mr.
Kooch presented two options for financing. 
     Option 1 (VPSA) would add a 2-cent tax impact with a 20-year financing
term.
     Option 2 (Lease Revenue) would eliminate the 2-cent tax impact with 25-
year financing.

     Mr. Harvey asked if the county could absorb some of the $3 million in
the lower interest rates currently in place and Mr. Kooch said yes but that
he’d have to do the figures.  Mr. Harvey then asked if the project was
still doable financially.  Mr. Kooch said that he felt it was but that he
would want to see the final figures.
     Mr. Carter presented the Supervisors with a cost estimate for the
School Garage and Maintenance Facility.  The estimate for a 12,720 sq ft
building was:

Construction              $1,000,677
10% Contingency              100,067
Associated Project Costs     128,058
TOTAL                     $1,228,802

Meeting adjourned.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
This report, sent to over 250 Nelson County citizens, was made possible by
the generous donations of Rural Nelson members. 

Kim T. Cash
Field Officer
Rural Nelson, Inc.
P. O. Box 401
(622 Front Street)
Lovingston, VA 22949
434-263-5000
www.ruralnelson.org