Whitnall School Board Cringes at Initial Project Estimate

Members of the Whitnall School Board pressed architecture and construction officials Monday night after learning they have initially estimated the to be nearly $1 million more than the budgeted amount. 

According to officials from , the project slated to be $6.5 million would be an estimated $7.4 million if completed as currently scaled by the firms.

"This is what I have budgeted for. My pocketbook is not infinite, it's finite," School Board member TJ Anderson said at a board work session Monday.

The estimate, however, is the result of a natural over-enunciation that a project of this magnitude typically experiences at its inception, according to Randall Schmitz, an architect at Eppstein Uhen. 

"We need to go back and say that we really don't need to do this piece so let's pull it back," Schmitz said. "We are confident in the next couple of days that we can do that and get it back to where it needs to be. I don't think that is going to be a problem. We are not going to sacrifice the original scope and what we promised we were going to deliver."

Schmitz used the example of baseball diamonds. Instead of renovating the fields, architects have grand visions of constructing new diamonds, which as a result, increases the cost of the entire project.

"If you guys do a really fabulous job and it comes to $5.6 million, then oh boy, we will have something left over from the bond issue," School Board president Bill Osterndorf said. "If, on the other hand, we are at $7.4 million, we are going to kick your (butt)." 

The anxiousness on the part of the School Board stems from their wishing to prioritize the various components of the project. In addition to improving the stormwater management throughout the high school's property and upgrading baseball fields, the project involves stadium improvements including installing a turf field, an eight-lane running track and new bleachers, field lighting and a press box.

Other phases of the project include upgrading the softball fields, renovating the existing tennis courts and adding three new ones, and renovating the student parking lot. A few school officials and board members inquired whether renovating the pool is feasible and should be a priority. 

The school board's hand-wringing is a product of watching the soup being made. School boards are often not privy to the inner workings of budget estimations and scope alignment at the onset of architectural and construction projects.   

"You may have worked with a lot of boards in the past, but this board, in my opinion, is completely different," Anderson said. "We are all really active and care about what we do. … This board is very active and very concerned. We take all of this very personally."

Another point of consternation for school board members was the timeline of the project, which will be complete by the fall of 2012, according to architecture and construction officials.  

To ease their concerns, officials from both Eppstein Uhen and VJS agreed to update the school board on their budget-tightening progress in two weeks. 

"If we need to have more meetings, I hope you are comfortable with that, because I think I am going to start requiring it," Anderson said. "I personally want to hear every aspect of this and where we stand on this."

The discussion regarding cost estimates evolved during a broader conversation regarding capital projects priorities that could possibility be completed with the $6.5 million district bond issue, approved this spring by the board. 

Because the project hinges on the bond issue and not the district's capital budget, it creates a different set of expectations throughout the school administration and school community, according to Osterndorf.