The additional funding for CHS boilers
The Council agenda for Tuesday's meeting includes the use of some funds from the $350,000 that was added to the schools' CNR account last October. And since someone asked about it, here's the gist of it:
I think it's also worth revisiting Jimmy Sima's comments from last Thursday. He mentioned that the town funds maintenance projects for the schools through the Capital Non-Recurring fund (CNR). And before this $350,000 was added, $500,000 of the $1,400,000 CNR account had already been dedicated to the schools. So that's an additional $850,000 that many school systems include in their "per pupil" spending calculation.
But back to the boilers... I'm not sure who "owned" the uninsured problems that were found when the boilers were opened.
Tim White
12 comments:
Hopefully you will ask who owned them.
I have to question why do these projects go out to bid and supposedly everyone bids fairly. The project will typically go to the low bidder. Now, they begin working on the project and find additional problems that will increase the cost of the repair. How do we know if the others who bid on the project would have found the same issues?
I recall the Norton Boiler also had added expenses after White-Bowman began the project....
Makes you want to go ...Hmmmmmmmm
Another example of the Bowmans taking and taking and taking etc. How many bids did we take on this job? The town should take a hard look at how they take bids and really look at wether or not the low bid is really the best route for all cases.
Tim, I have not heard you mention or acknowlegde that in 1993, the BOE spent $500K to ahve the Norton Boilers reworked/replaced. These things should have lasted for 50 *&^$@#! years. What was done or wasn't done in 1993???THAT"S the problem--every 8-10 years there is a completely different TC & BOE nobody remembers who has done what & when.
Who has the contract?
Why doesn't this come out of the school budget?
I thought that when you put out work for a bid, you would have competent people submitting a bid and the bidder would then have to do the work for that price. If it doesn't work like that, what is the purpose of putting it out to bid. In this case, maybe the next highest bidder would have done the job with no additional cost over his bid. The way things seem to be going, Matt Bowman puts in a low bid knowing that when he comes back for more money, he will get it.
Let's go people, you better learn to write up these projects so that the taxpayers aren't always stuck.
reposted from 1:15am
(deleted)
How many bids did we take on this job? The town should take a hard look at how they take bids and really look at wether or not the low bid is really the best route for all cases.
I have a S1 (unlimited heating contractors license) for the state of connecticut and do a lot of this work. In fact I bid this job against White Bowman and wanted to see what the blogs had to say. As a independent contractor to the job I want to clear a few things about. There is no possible way to determine the structural integrity of the sections during the bid process. The bid was basically to take the boilers apart, re gasket them and and put them back on line. I spoke to the sales rep that looked at the job. The sections needed to be replaced because they had a groove in them. I have known Matt Bowman for many years and have bid many projects against him. This is not a case of him low bidding the job and getting an extra. This is the case of unforeseen conditions. People who do not have a clue what they are talking about should not open there mouths. Get informed so you do sound like idiots. I wish I got the job, but a hard bid works that way. This kind of work is painstaking and back breaking. We as contractors deserve every penny of it. From Jim, New Haven, Union Local 777
I thought that when you put out work for a bid, you would have competent people submitting a bid and the bidder would then have to do the work for that price.I recently got rear-ended. The appraiser asked me if I had damage inside the trunk. But I didn't open the trunk because the it may not have closed again.
My point is that I'm not of the opinion that you'll necessarily find all the problems until you go inside.
The problem from my perspective is one of confidence. Time and again, this Council has demonstrated it is a total failure at the confluence of energy and engineering.
The only way to rectify that problem is to fire the Council in November.
You should play back that TC meeting in which the winning bidder said that it would cost the Town no more than the bid amount. What is going on? Was this something unforseen or should it have been brought to someone's attention as a potential problem in the bidding process?
One thing which keeps playing out in plain sight with bids like this one is the quality of the work by town departments in preparing bid packages. All too often the original agreed to scope and costs are out-the-window and a last minute set of changes on-the -fly are required. In some cases it seems changes are agreed to in the field before those responsible get their say on things.
A case could be made that BOE and whoever they rely upon within municipal government, like public works, are out of their league technically in the bid scope preparation process. And worse, it could just be a game of playing politics - - not letting everyone know up front that because of lack of effective and timely maintenance yet another system is really broke and will cost ###!@#@$$! dollars to fix.
Where in town government is there any expertise in the operation and repair of significant boiler systems, or significant mobile pool roof enclosures, or sewage pumping stations etc? In addition where is the expertise in project organization and coordination?
Based on performance it would appear that even though municipal employees ( BOE and DPW etc) receive pay raise after pay raise their overall expertise is only marginally valuable to the process of effectively hiring contractors who are able to complete tasks as agreed to by the official bidding process.
Those supervisory personnel in town government, BOE included, responsible for preparing these bid packages need to be held responsible for a trend of poor technical expertise, poor ongoing routine maintenance, and very poor planning.
Maybe a little performance based contracting is the only thing left to save us from ourselves.
Tim -
It might interesting to know if "S1 Jim" from Local Union 777 (April 13, 2009 8:58 PM) was blogging from New Haven or from our town. Can you determine this from your web-stats?
"It's A Wonderful Life". CHESHIRE= POTTERSVILLE. You figure it out.
Post a Comment