Tuesday, July 22, 2008

PBC subcommittee minutes July 11 - hWg 34

Shhh... you're not supposed to know about this...
Tim White


Anonymous said...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but shouldn't there be an inspection when work is completed to make sure it is up to code? How could the last boiler been installed without a foundation? Shouldn't an inspector have caught that? Shouldn't the people responsible for instlling that in the first place be held responsible?
Now we have W-B moving it and I am sure there will be "leaks" or some other costly repair that wasn't budgeted.
One last question, if moving the boiler was part of the original contract, wasn't there a risk involved whether or not a foundation was under it?Shouldn't that have been part of the original bidding? I don't see how it not having a foundation could add to more risk then there already would be. But I'm not in the business. Just like to have answers.

tim white said...

shhh... I told you... you're not supposed to know about this!

Don't you remember last year when I tried to improve transparency and all I got from the majority was... "Tim, you're micromanaging!"

Seriously though... good questions. But I suspect the only way to get answers is to significantly change the composition of the Council.

Remember, I asked about "secondary impacts" on the northend development at a November 2007 public hearing. I asked during a televised meeting of the PZC. And what response did I get?


Nope, you'll need new Council members, if you want any answers.

And if you want that, then I encourage you to write letters to the editor and voice your concerns in a more public format.


Anonymous said...

How are the Republicans doing in finding canidates??
I sure hope they are woking on it.
We need to fix this problem.

Anonymous said...

The previous boiler was put in by a specialty contractor that the town worked with sucessfully for many years according to all accounts. Now that they're out, let's blame them for WB's ineptitude. Typical strategy from Team Bowman.

Anonymous said...

It is hard to understand why the supposed lack of a foundation, whatever that really means, is an issue at this late stage.

As part of the bid process wasn’t there an inspection period for perspective bidders to view the proposed work site?

Assuming the bidders actually inspected where the work was to be done this shouldn’t be an issue this late into the project.

If they did inspect prior to bidding how could they have missed this supposed issue at that point?

If they didn’t miss it why did they keep it secret so long?

And if no one inspected the work site for obvious issues prior to asking for proposals the town is clearly paying salary dollars for which not much beneficial labor can be shown either.

Breachway said...

Good thing Bowman promised us that there would be no extra costs....

Anonymous said...

It seems that on the 2nd of July the town showed concern for a couple of outstanding issues such as seismic. Such a term, it could mean nothing or it could be serious. Was the town really speaking about pipe hangers or was there something more significant being brought forward concerning the safe operation of the heating equipment being installed?

Now the installer is writing change orders for foundations. In some quarters foundations are kind of the bedrock of seismic issues and maybe the town’s concern about seismic is not related to the plumber wanting to pour a concrete pad for a furnace installation either. Of course maybe seismic may not even be an issue for the minds of the plumbers doing this job, we may never know.

So, what is really going on here and should we all be certain at this point that the school building is really being safely operated by our school officials.

Anonymous said...

"at this point that the school building is really being safely operated by our school officials."

Where is Florio? He had a lot to say about how great artificial turf was and wasn't concerned about safety issue. He is certainly overpaid.

Breachway said...

When they say a change will be submitted....does that mean Bowman is backing out of his promise and charging the town more money???

Anonymous said...


Bowman admits he is "dragging" the boiler around, but doesn't want to be responisble if it leaks.

Is "dragging" a boiler taught in boiler class? Shouldn't this boiler be properly rigged by professionals? Is the move procedure sanctioned by the manufacturer?

No, dragging a boiler is not taught in boiler class. Bowman got an F in that class too, anyway. Anyone who cannot speak or write complete sentences should not be handling a project where our children occupy any building, let alone a school. He did work for me once; don't get me started on that one. This issue shows that his experience should have been closely questioned as the bid had requested.

Anonymous said...

"This issue shows that his experience should have been closely questioned"

Experience doesn't matter, he's a Bowman. The Dems always support them. They have their fund drives, honorariums and whatever else at Matt's house. Matt's lawyer is Matt Hall and the fact that Matt Hall is the Chairman of the Town Council probably also helps.

Politics pays here in Bomanville, I mean Cheshire.

Anonymous said...

Point conceded. I guess I just meant that certain things we have to draw the line on. Our kids' facilities should be one of them.

Bid procedures are regulated to be objective, to eliminate the politics. I fail to see how we will avoid a lawsuit.

Anonymous said...

How did a teacher get to be chair of the PBC? Let's get a plumber to teach our children. We are doing things backwards. HELP!!!!