Expensive Concession Stand Continues to Irk Board Members
Even after a representative from the construction company explained why the stand cost $68,000, some board members feel the district did not get enough for its money.
The senior vice president of the construction company that built Greenfield High School, assured the Greenfield School Board it got its money’s worth during the project, even when the company erected an expensive concession stand.
Dan Davis of CG Schmidt also told board members Monday a $68,000 price tag on a 12-foot-by-16-foot concession stand near the high school baseball field was a result of looking beyond short-term objectives.
“We looked at the concession stand as phase one of a larger project,” Davis said.
Davis said the original plan called for storage space and possibly locker rooms at the location, and that adding toilets is something that’s always been in the works. He added that the concession stand as it is now is more of a remote kitchen.
“Unfortunately, it’s got to meet all those codes to be a kitchen,” Davis said. “We went to the city and they said we’re not going to give you a building permit unless you meet all the codes. …. And the end plan was to have toilets there, so you had to have water, you had to have power and you have to have sanitary sewer.
“It all adds up. We didn’t have a lot of choice necessarily, about what we put in this building.”
Board member Rick Moze disagreed. He said he’s been hearing complaints about the concession stand for a year and a half and said the taxpayers feel “they got ripped off.”
“You can build a 1,700-square-foot house with four bedrooms, two and a half bath and two-car attached garage for $133,690,” Moze said. “That’s with a basement, heating system, insulation. You could live it in all year. And we paid $68,000 for a 12-by-16 shed.”
Board member Russ Spahn questioned referencing the concession stand as a remote kitchen since there is no room for an oven, stove or refrigerator. He said the building feels undersized for the amount of investment made.
“It cost us a lot of money and it’s not really designed to be improved upon in the future,” Spahn said. “It’s just a little building; it’s not truly a kitchen.”
Davis said the district could add toilets to the facility and still keep the entire cost of the project under $100,000. He said other districts are spending much more on similar facilities.
“It’s the first phase of a facility that will add to the value of your campus,” Davis said. “I understand, when you compare it to a house, it may look like a relatively small building. But when you get down to the detail, (the cost is) not unreasonable at all.”