Another Change Order (s)

[twhl]

For my company I am involved with contract / project management and any time the word change order comes up it means more $$ to my customer. They note change orders(s) which means there are more than one and it will cost more. This could also mean the General Contractor is asking for more $$ to compress the schedule. Curious as to where we are at on budget as the only thing that Dr D mentions is MV is on schedule, never mentions anything about budget. In the timeline, they already know if they are under, on, or over budget.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
P R E P A R I N G A L L S T U D E N T S T O S U C C E E D
Crouse Education Center
P.O. Box 3990, Naperville, IL 60567
phone: [phone] • fax: [phone] • web: www.ipsd.org
________________________________________________________________________
Board of Education Offices
November 24, 2008
Crouse Education Center
Work Session: 5:00-6:00 p.m. – Actuarial Valuation – Dave Holm
E-course Update – Dr. Birkett, Dave Zolnier
Dinner in room A1: 6:00-7:00 p.m. – Executive Session
Agenda – start: 7:00 p.m.
AGENDA
I. Call to Order - Roll Call
II. Pledge of Allegiance
III. Board Salutes
IV. High School Student Representative Report – NVHS – Sana Rahim
V. Minutes
A. Executive Session - November 10, 2008
B. Regular Meeting, Board of Education – November 10, 2008
Board Action:
VI. Consent Calendar and Superintendent’s Report
(Persons requesting to address the board on specific agenda items will speak
when that item is brought forward.)
A. Approval of Collection Agency RFP Recommendation
(This item recommends that the Board of Education approve the
use of Centurion Service Corporation as the new agency to recover
Agenda for the Regular Meeting of the Board of Education
November 24, 2008
- 2 –
unpaid fees, as presented.)
(Policy #410.30)
B. Approval of 30-Day Display of New Texts and Materials for Middle
School Textbook Adoption – Family and Consumer Science Grades
(This item recommends that the Board of Education approve the 30-day
Display of New Texts and Materials, as presented.)
(Policy #620, #654.11)
C. Approval of 30-Day Display of New Texts and Materials for High School
Textbook Adoption – Applied Technology
(This item recommends that the Board of Education approve the 30-day
Display of New Texts and Materials, as presented.)
(Policy #620, #654.11)
D. Approval of 30-Day Display of New Texts and Materials for High School
Textbook Adoption – Family and Consumer Science (8th Grade Foods)
(This item recommends that the Board of Education approve the 30-day
Display of New Texts and Materials, as presented.)
(Policy #620, #654.11)
[glow=red,2,300]E. Approval of Construction Change Orders for Metea Valley High School
(This item recommends that the Board of Education approve the change
Orders for Metea Valley High School, as presented.)
(Policy #460.08) The circumstances said to necessitate these changes in
performance were not reasonably foreseeable at the time the contract was
signed, or the change is germane to the original contract as signed or the
change order is in the best interest of the school district.[/glow]F. Business & Financial Items
(This item recommends that the Board of Education approve the Schedule
of Bills, Treasurer’s Report, and the Other Fund Reports as presented
and authorizes the Treasurer to pay the bills.)
(Policy #415.01)
G. Personnel Report
1. Personnel Matters
2. Leaves (Policies #521.01, #525, #540.11)
3. Resignations (Policies #520.15)
4. Employment (Policies #500.01, #500.24, #500.29, #500.28, #520.02,
#520.02-R, #540.01)
Board Action:
Agenda for the Regular Meeting of the Board of Education
November 24, 2008
- 3 –
VII. Action Items
A. Approval of General Obligation School Refunding Bonds, Series 2008 -
$10,000,000
Recommendation: That the Board of Education adopt the Resolution
providing for the issues of not to exceed $10,000,000 General Obligation
School Refunding Bonds, Series 2008, of Community Unit School District
Number 204, DuPage and Will Counties, Illinois, and for the levy of a direct
annual tax sufficient to pay the principal and interest on said bonds, as
presented.
Board Action:
B. Approval of General Obligation School Refunding Bonds, Series 2008 -
$6,000,000
Recommendation: That the Board of Education adopt the Resolution
providing for the issue of not to exceed $6,000,000 General Obligation School
Refunding Bonds of Community Unit School District Number 204, DuPage
and Will Counties, Illinois, and for the levy of a direct annual tax sufficient to
pay the principal and interest on said bonds, as presented.
Board Action:
VIII. Discussion Items (no board action taken)
A. School Improvement Plans (SIP) Process – Dr. Popp
B. Planning Calendar
IX. Board Reports/Requests
X.
Persons Requesting to Address the Board on Non-Agenda Items
XI. Executive Session: Land Acquisition and Litigation
XII. Adjournment
Upcoming Dates/Events
Dec. 8 Regular Meeting of the Board of Education – 5:00 p.m. – CEC
Jan. 12 Regular Meeting of the Board of Education – 5:00 p.m. – CEC
Jan. 26 Regular Meeting of the Board of Education – 5:00 p.m. – CEC

[Arch]

"(Policy #460.08) The circumstances said to necessitate these changes in
performance were not reasonably foreseeable at the time the contract was
signed, or the change is germane to the original contract as signed or the
change order is in the best interest of the school district."

Curious about that as well. What 'changed' and what 'circumstances' are at issue here?

Often these details are part of Executive Session and nothing comes out to the public.

[doctorwho]

Nov 21, 2008 11:30:36 GMT -6 twhl said:

For my company I am involved with contract / project management and any time the word change order comes up it means more $$ to my customer. They note change orders(s) which means there are more than one and it will cost more. This could also mean the General Contractor is asking for more $$ to compress the schedule. Curious as to where we are at on budget as the only thing that Dr D mentions is MV is on schedule, never mentions anything about budget. In the timeline, they already know if they are under, on, or over budget.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
P R E P A R I N G A L L S T U D E N T S T O S U C C E E D
Crouse Education Center
P.O. Box 3990, Naperville, IL 60567
phone: [phone] • fax: [phone] • web: www.ipsd.org
________________________________________________________________________
Board of Education Offices
November 24, 2008
Crouse Education Center
Work Session: 5:00-6:00 p.m. – Actuarial Valuation – Dave Holm
E-course Update – Dr. Birkett, Dave Zolnier
Dinner in room A1: 6:00-7:00 p.m. – Executive Session
Agenda – start: 7:00 p.m.
AGENDA
I. Call to Order - Roll Call
II. Pledge of Allegiance
III. Board Salutes
IV. High School Student Representative Report – NVHS – Sana Rahim
V. Minutes
A. Executive Session - November 10, 2008
B. Regular Meeting, Board of Education – November 10, 2008
Board Action:
VI. Consent Calendar and Superintendent’s Report
(Persons requesting to address the board on specific agenda items will speak
when that item is brought forward.)
A. Approval of Collection Agency RFP Recommendation
(This item recommends that the Board of Education approve the
use of Centurion Service Corporation as the new agency to recover
Agenda for the Regular Meeting of the Board of Education
November 24, 2008
- 2 –
unpaid fees, as presented.)
(Policy #410.30)
B. Approval of 30-Day Display of New Texts and Materials for Middle
School Textbook Adoption – Family and Consumer Science Grades
(This item recommends that the Board of Education approve the 30-day
Display of New Texts and Materials, as presented.)
(Policy #620, #654.11)
C. Approval of 30-Day Display of New Texts and Materials for High School
Textbook Adoption – Applied Technology
(This item recommends that the Board of Education approve the 30-day
Display of New Texts and Materials, as presented.)
(Policy #620, #654.11)
D. Approval of 30-Day Display of New Texts and Materials for High School
Textbook Adoption – Family and Consumer Science (8th Grade Foods)
(This item recommends that the Board of Education approve the 30-day
Display of New Texts and Materials, as presented.)
(Policy #620, #654.11)
[glow=red,2,300]E. Approval of Construction Change Orders for Metea Valley High School
(This item recommends that the Board of Education approve the change
Orders for Metea Valley High School, as presented.)
(Policy #460.08) The circumstances said to necessitate these changes in
performance were not reasonably foreseeable at the time the contract was
signed, or the change is germane to the original contract as signed or the
change order is in the best interest of the school district.[/glow]F. Business & Financial Items
(This item recommends that the Board of Education approve the Schedule
of Bills, Treasurer’s Report, and the Other Fund Reports as presented
and authorizes the Treasurer to pay the bills.)
(Policy #415.01)
G. Personnel Report
1. Personnel Matters
2. Leaves (Policies #521.01, #525, #540.11)
3. Resignations (Policies #520.15)
4. Employment (Policies #500.01, #500.24, #500.29, #500.28, #520.02,
#520.02-R, #540.01)
Board Action:
Agenda for the Regular Meeting of the Board of Education
November 24, 2008
- 3 –
VII. Action Items
A. Approval of General Obligation School Refunding Bonds, Series 2008 -
$10,000,000
Recommendation: That the Board of Education adopt the Resolution
providing for the issues of not to exceed $10,000,000 General Obligation
School Refunding Bonds, Series 2008, of Community Unit School District
Number 204, DuPage and Will Counties, Illinois, and for the levy of a direct
annual tax sufficient to pay the principal and interest on said bonds, as
presented.
Board Action:
B. Approval of General Obligation School Refunding Bonds, Series 2008 -
$6,000,000
Recommendation: That the Board of Education adopt the Resolution
providing for the issue of not to exceed $6,000,000 General Obligation School
Refunding Bonds of Community Unit School District Number 204, DuPage
and Will Counties, Illinois, and for the levy of a direct annual tax sufficient to
pay the principal and interest on said bonds, as presented.
Board Action:
VIII. Discussion Items (no board action taken)
A. School Improvement Plans (SIP) Process – Dr. Popp
B. Planning Calendar
IX. Board Reports/Requests
X.
Persons Requesting to Address the Board on Non-Agenda Items
XI. Executive Session: Land Acquisition and Litigation
XII. Adjournment
Upcoming Dates/Events
Dec. 8 Regular Meeting of the Board of Education – 5:00 p.m. – CEC
Jan. 12 Regular Meeting of the Board of Education – 5:00 p.m. – CEC
Jan. 26 Regular Meeting of the Board of Education – 5:00 p.m. – CEC

Already word going around that the pool is going to be delayed past the following fall. Wonder if that is part of this ?

Also no one is going to tell you if they are on budget at all-- when one feels they have a blank checkbook - things like budgets appears unimportant

[rew]

I have another question in regards to the "refunding" bonds...do we know what interest we are paying?

Treasuries are at an all time low, something like 3% on a ten year note, but what is the market for these bonds? I have heard general obligation municipal bonds were paying a higher yield? Does anyone know what the % is on the bonds currently and what the current market rate is for these reiisuances?

[doctorwho]

Nov 21, 2008 12:45:43 GMT -6 rew said:

I have another question in regards to the "refunding" bonds...do we know what interest we are paying?

Treasuries are at an all time low, something like 3% on a ten year note, but what is the market for these bonds? I have heard general obligation municipal bonds were paying a higher yield? Does anyone know what the % is on the bonds currently and what the current market rate is for these reiisuances?

We will get details of the change order at the meeting tonight - but be prepared for an additional $650K of cost ......
reasons ranging from structural changes to additional wages - mostly due to site change and delivery schedule. Likely won't be the last of these.

[blankcheck]

Where do you think I came up with my screen name? We have been giving this SD a
"Blankcheck" for a very long time!!!

[twhl]

Nov 24, 2008 9:35:10 GMT -6 doctorwho said:

Nov 21, 2008 12:45:43 GMT -6 rew said:

I have another question in regards to the "refunding" bonds...do we know what interest we are paying?

Treasuries are at an all time low, something like 3% on a ten year note, but what is the market for these bonds? I have heard general obligation municipal bonds were paying a higher yield? Does anyone know what the % is on the bonds currently and what the current market rate is for these reiisuances?

We will get details of the change order at the meeting tonight - but be prepared for an additional $650K of cost ......
reasons ranging from structural changes to additional wages - mostly due to site change and delivery schedule. Likely won't be the last of these.

#! - Who requested the structural change, what was it and why was it needed
#2 - Delivery schedule - according to "everyone" construction is on schedule which implies in the real world its on schedule and at or under budget. Any buffoon can keep a project on schedule with unlimited funds. I think I remember seeing that on the referendum ballot.

[casey]

Here's my favorite line "or the change order is in the best interest of the school district". Yup, I always believe that our SB is after the best interest of the school district. That is true but unfortunately at what cost ? Realistically, what is this 2009 date going to cost us? Again, what is the benefit of going crazy pushing for that opening date? Oh yeah, the serious overcrowding that our district is suffering? This school is going to cost up-wards of $150+ million but we will never know the true cost (don't forget the immeasurable cost of putting the school in THAT location).

How in the heck can our current SB just sit there and blindly pass change orders that continue to increase the costs of MV? Will we stop at nothing? Where is that money coming from? Help!

[Arch]

The interesting lines from the evening came from JS and MM about the amounts:

JS: was surprised to point out a work order change for a negative amount.

and later

MM: we negotiated down the costs from what was originally approved.

For a moment, that almost sounded like these change orders are all 'savings'... but 'savings' compared to what, exactly? When one adds more structural support and labor wages go up from the original amounts, that doesn't sound like a 'savings'.. it sounds like more cost.

Some of the structural stuff and concrete cost increases had something to do with the soil being different from the original MWGEN soil analysis... (( Remember, there wasn't time to get an appraisal of the land, and I would guess there wasn't time to get a soil analysis either )). There's is/was a drainage problem because this soil apparently has more 'silt' than the other land and this caused some things to have to be redone or done differently than originally planned/designed; according to Todd DePaul (If I recall correctly from his explanations) "Silty sandy soil and water runs within the silt...need to drain the water away from the silt" I'm not sure what that all implies but that stood out from his explanations this evening.

[rew]

Maybe this was all the clay they were adding to the soil last spring?

People assumed it was to dry out the land, because of the rains, but I think it was rj that pointed out it could be the soil may have needed amending.

Either way, at the time, I assumed it would mean more $$$.

Hopefully the people lined up to purchase the 25 acres at BB will be in too much of a hurry to test the soil...Has the board talked about the sale recently??

[Arch]

No mention of it last night. (25 acres).

[overtaxed]

Nov 24, 2008 12:31:59 GMT -6 blankcheck said:

Where do you think I came up with my screen name? We have been giving this SD a
"Blankcheck" for a very long time!!!

HA HA, Great minds think a like--where do you think I came up with my name? The blank check outcome is our overtaxed income.

[overtaxed]

This SB is always keeping us guessing by what will be their next trick. We always know it's coming, the question is always what will it be this time.............

[twhl]

Nov 24, 2008 22:30:54 GMT -6 Arch said:

The interesting lines from the evening came from JS and MM about the amounts:

JS: was surprised to point out a work order change for a negative amount.

and later

MM: we negotiated down the costs from what was originally approved.

For a moment, that almost sounded like these change orders are all 'savings'... but 'savings' compared to what, exactly? When one adds more structural support and labor wages go up from the original amounts, that doesn't sound like a 'savings'.. it sounds like more cost.

Some of the structural stuff and concrete cost increases had something to do with the soil being different from the original MWGEN soil analysis... (( Remember, there wasn't time to get an appraisal of the land, and I would guess there wasn't time to get a soil analysis either )). There's is/was a drainage problem because this soil apparently has more 'silt' than the other land and this caused some things to have to be redone or done differently than originally planned/designed; according to Todd DePaul (If I recall correctly from his explanations) "Silty sandy soil and water runs within the silt...need to drain the water away from the silt" I'm not sure what that all implies but that stood out from his explanations this evening.

Thanks Arch .
For starters - this is a firm fixed price contract. The question is when was the contract signed? They cant still be using the original from Brach Brodie, can they? Most times you have a change order it is because there is a change in scope(work to be performed) requested by the customer (D204). The fact that Turner signed the contract means they were aware of the possibility there may be soil differences. Sooooooo maybe the contract was signed with another wink-wink or handshake that change orders would be permissible and approved if they needed to be. Can we get a copy of the contract through FOIA? Turner construction does this type of work all over the country. They also have a risk fund built in to the contract that is somewhere between 7-12% of the total project value. At $135m you are looking at a $9.45 - $16.2million bucket of our tax dollars that they can tap in to should the need arise without any contract mods or work change orders. Generally this is used so if there is a need to hire more folks or subcontractors to meet schedule, cost of materials go up, they need to redo design and design drawings, weather, etc, etc. If they don't use it this margin goes right to their profit column. Thats why they call it "risk". If the soil was different than the fix should be at Turners expense, not our taxes. Thats why they call them firm fixed price contracts. If Turner didn't do a soil analysis then shame on them. Sorry.

But in order to keep them happy and build this thing at all costs, our great business folks at the Board made it sound like with some grind em out meetings they sat down and on D204's behalf negotiated a lower cost of what was previously approved. Hellooooooooooo?!?!?!?!

I find it extremely difficult to believe that Turners Contract Managers their staff Geologists and the MV Project Manager didn't anticipate this as a possibility. This so called negative $$ amount for a change order normally occurs when their is a scope reduction which means D204 changed the plans and cut something out of the original design, not because they negotiated a lesser $$ amount for the same services. You don't negotiate costs in the middle of a construction project and since we are such great negotiators I really doubt this was the case.

[Arch]

Interesting analysis. I wish they had the details of the changes and cost of each change available on the website. That would help clarify if I either misheard things that were spoken or if what was said was even the whole story...

I keep thinking back to a January land meeting where things were 'presented'.. but turns out they were misre'presented'. Again, the specifics (of they would post them) would clear that up.