Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is a cross post with the thread f5 started. Hughes didn't have the licenses when n their bid was submitted. The second on the list was the company from Victor. They didn't complete their bid correctly. So D # 93 is starting over with the bidding process.
This seems clueless beyond my comprehension. D# 93's school board found so much wrong in Headwater's application, from Victor, they won't be allowed to submit a new proposal. Headwaters had planned on using a CA-based GC/CM. It makes the complaints about the Hughes Corp. look very petty. Hughes didn't include their licenses correctly. I don't know if they can re-apply or not, but Headwater cannot. D #93's attorney in Boise will review all bids first to make sure the paperwork is completed correctly etc.
Two School Board Council members won't sit in on any presentations to ensure "the same group" doesn't hear presentations. Finally, RFFQs will be advertised on 3/1/2016 and reviewed on 3/15/2016. The board is wondering if they should change criteria a little bit so local companies can be ranked higher
Maybe the school district should also start with a new supervisor and board, then get the quotes.
The need for a new high school is too dire for it to stall out with a complete board election.
There were a large majority of school patrons who wanted a new high school from the first bond proposal, but the laws set such a high majority for bonds to be approved that the minority was able to keep 3 proposals from passing.
The 3rd failure came at the most critical time; there was a small time window when all the contractors were hungry for work and would negotiate, all the materials suppliers were the same, and all the interest rates were at their lowest.
If the bond had passed that year, the school would have been a real bargain and would have been completed just as the huge wave of kids would be going into high school.
The last bond passed in large part because of that great missed opportunity, and the bidding was done fast, in hopes of getting the school finished a year after the others will overtop with the student flood.
The fact is, the new high school should have built long ago and already be in operation. The county growth, along with Ammon's growth was ignored far too long, but there was a lot of very bright writing on the wall- a bunch of new elementary schools were build in the 1990's, and they are all full up to their capacities.
If the 6th grade class is huge- 3 or 4 times the size of all others- it's a pretty good sign a higher school will be needed if the jr. highs and high schools are all over capacity.
They moved too fast. It happens, especially when there is such time pressure. Who ever they select now will be qualified. Hard lesson, for sure, but all the districts are facing hard lessons. Idaho let her schools go to hell for too long and let her best teachers run off to other states where they are paid better and treated with more respect.
And now that the neglect is biting us in the butt since the jobs are coming back, playing catch-up is a steep uphill climb. Here we are, 10 years later, and we still haven't caught up to what we were willing to spend on our schools in 2006.
That 10 year gap is something that will cost all of a lot more than the temporary savings were worth. But that's Idaho; we're always willing to stumble over a dollar to pick up a nickel.
Maybe the school district should also start with a new supervisor and board, then get the quotes.
f5,
Mike made several good points. D#93 will probably need to get started on a new jr. high soon, then as long as it took on this high school, get started on a 4th high school. Between new residents and what were new residents about 6-7 yrs. ago, that required six new elementary schools to be built, there are classes about to reach jr. high school. We're really going to see some packed classrooms.
What is worse is a shift to build new Townhomes in D#93. Anywhere from 150 - 300 new Townhomes to be started this year, let alone new sections of some big subdivisions, like Comora Loma. Family sizes may be smaller but there will be more of them.
What I really wanted to answer here was the Superintendent hasn't been involved. Besides the School Board, the person representing the district is the Director of Schools, Facilities and Operations. I know his name (from the media, I don't know him). However, I don't like to write names here unless it is someone who ran for public office.
Is this *double botch* enough to hire him? Doubtful. No one got hurt physically or even threatened. I'm with Mike, there isn't enough time to vote for new school board members. However, if I had a kid or two in the District, I'd seriously think about running for the School Board. I have no idea who these board members are. But I'd keep track for an election.
What I see overall is inexperience. How come they didn't ask for help? IDK. I think more of those who ask for help and get it right. I'm not overly optomistic they know how to post for bids so Idaho GC/CMs are given preferential treatment. They really shouldn't release all of that to the media.
I still think there wasn't a connection with Hughes Construction. The fact Headwaters from Victor, the second choice, didn't even have licensed personnel in Idaho or would be by May with all their licenses ( the person to take this on is in CA. Whether he has any Idaho licenses or has passed the GC/CM exam in Idaho and is awaiting his license, IDK. My understanding was no. He wouldn't take the exam unless the company won, but I could be wrong). If anything, I'd say the Victor company had an in, no one else. I think inexperience probably is the real reason.
Bateman-Hall and Ormond have employees who live in the district. That fact is just starting to click in the school board members' brains. I'm not sure if Bateman-Hall will even bid, given that D #91 selected them for both high schools plus everything else they are building in about 10 states. Like Theotherdude, I'd like to see Bateman-Hall get the contract because the quality of their work is so high. But Ormond is solid too, IMO. It would be nice to see some Bannock County and Treasure Valley construction companies bid as well.
I doubt comedy could be written to equal the missteps in this process. I have no idea how long this Director of Facilities etc. has worked for the district aND whe the he's been involved in any construction.. For a three story school they will have to have elevators, which sren't common in Idaho High Schools.
If I were you, I'd plan to attend the school's open house in a few years. After this much difficulty, everyone should eyeball that school and perhaps write a note on a wall somewhere for future generations
So, you need a physical threat or damage in order to replace politicians and that is primarily what a school board is. Darn I never knew that before! However, if I lived in that school district, I might see if a recall for the board was legal, and if yes, then go after them.
So, go ahead with the current group, who have shown they don't know squat, and let the roll of the dice decide if they are doing a good job. Not my school district; thus not my problem. But this will come out for the next bond election and will be held against them. So hopefully, before the next sob story hits about a new school, maybe they should dump the current board and start new.
What this state needs to do is drop all these little independent school districts and divide the state into about three or four districts and let those areas be the school districts. That way you have three of four districts vs. 116. Just think of the costs you save from must dumping 112 superintendents to the street? And then the administration staff? Granted the administration staffs of the three or four will be a lot larger than a current district, there is no way they will employee any where near the number the 116 districts do now.
What's the average pay in ID for school superintendents, $75K (I'm guessing, I know in MI and NY it was well over $125K). So if the average pay of all is $8,700,000 (not counting their retirements). Drop that down to four districts that have superintendents paid (lets's say) $175,000 per year. So you have saved $8,000,000. And then there are the costs save by purchasing buses, fuel, insurance group plans, just normal supplies.
You then you might be able to consolidate schools. Not familiar with your area up there in ID, but could there be schools from 91 and 93 close to each other? Again, I remember in MI there were two places I knew where high schools from different districts were a half mile away from each other! So, I would say it could happen here too. Especially, in larger metro areas like around Boise.
I talk about this, but know it will NEVER happen. People are too close minded and want their so-called "local control" of the school board, even though most don't understand they still have NO control. In eastern states, and it might be true here too, school board members are heavily supported by unions. Seems like when most people vote they do not know who is running for school board, but the do see hundreds of signs so they tend to vote for that person. Guess who pays for those signs...unions. Unions, especially teacher unions, love local control of a school board, since that pretty much guarantees their salaries, benefits, retirements, etc. I wonder how true that is for ID?
Now that voting is not true of all. Those who are really involved will vote for who they think is best, but for people like me, who have not skin in the game; other than paying taxes, I don't even vote for a school board member. But I would bet 50% or more of the voters give very little thought of a school board.
As for visiting a high school in Idaho Falls? That is about as likely as me going back to work for this government! Which is ZERO!
So, you need a physical threat or damage in order to replace politicians and that is primarily what a school board is. Darn I never knew that before! However, if I lived in that school district, I might see if a recall for the board was legal, and if yes, then go after them.
So, go ahead with the current group, who have shown they don't know squat, and let the roll of the dice decide if they are doing a good job. Not my school district; thus not my problem. But this will come out for the next bond election and will be held against them. So hopefully, before the next sob story hits about a new school, maybe they should dump the current board and start new.
What this state needs to do is drop all these little independent school districts and divide the state into about three or four districts and let those areas be the school districts. That way you have three of four districts vs. 116. Just think of the costs you save from must dumping 112 superintendents to the street? And then the administration staff? Granted the administration staffs of the three or four will be a lot larger than a current district, there is no way they will employee any where near the number the 116 districts do now.
What's the average pay in ID for school superintendents, $75K (I'm guessing, I know in MI and NY it was well over $125K). So if the average pay of all is $8,700,000 (not counting their retirements). Drop that down to four districts that have superintendents paid (lets's say) $175,000 per year. So you have saved $8,000,000. And then there are the costs save by purchasing buses, fuel, insurance group plans, just normal supplies.
You then you might be able to consolidate schools. Not familiar with your area up there in ID, but could there be schools from 91 and 93 close to each other? Again, I remember in MI there were two places I knew where high schools from different districts were a half mile away from each other! So, I would say it could happen here too. Especially, in larger metro areas like around Boise.
I talk about this, but know it will NEVER happen. People are too close minded and want their so-called "local control" of the school board, even though most don't understand they still have NO control. In eastern states, and it might be true here too, school board members are heavily supported by unions. Seems like when most people vote they do not know who is running for school board, but the do see hundreds of signs so they tend to vote for that person. Guess who pays for those signs...unions. Unions, especially teacher unions, love local control of a school board, since that pretty much guarantees their salaries, benefits, retirements, etc. I wonder how true that is for ID?
Now that voting is not true of all. Those who are really involved will vote for who they think is best, but for people like me, who have not skin in the game; other than paying taxes, I don't even vote for a school board member. But I would bet 50% or more of the voters give very little thought of a school board.
As for visiting a high school in Idaho Falls? That is about as likely as me going back to work for this government! Which is ZERO!
Yip, I know about how much you want to visit any high school anywhere I added that for your humor. I was going to write something else, but thought about it a while and decided some might not view that unwritten comment as funny. I think you would have.......
I don't live in the District either. If I did I would have attended board meetings, been in their faces etc. And I would run at the next election for a seat. I go back to what Mike wrote. The need is too severe right now for me to delay that building one day. I do think some did complain for the District to use a Boise lawyer of Troxel -Hawley (not sure about that spelling). T-H is becoming a powerful law firm as they have bought out practices in C'dA, TF, IF and Poky. The attorneys remained the same just their letterhead changed. T-H bought a very component firm in Idaho Falls. To not use a local attorney, there were reasons. I have thoughts, but no specific knowledge.
One thing I do know is a former school board member was an attorney. He's now a City Council member in Ammon. I seriously doubt many realize how often that attorney probably kept the school board "functioning" during the years he served. I think now using an attorney to coach them through each step will help.......especially when that bill comes from Boise.
Recall would be difficult for six board members. I think "coaching" and " mentoring" serves everyone better currently. But I'd be at meetings to keep them accoountable.
I've stated I agree there are too many districts in Idaho. D#93 is a tough one as it goes to the WY border. I think there need to be more than four, but I think 100+ is excessive. Jefferson County, Clark County, maybe Power County and parts of Bingham could easily combine with one other school district. I bet the same is true in N ID and TF too. I'd prefer $ go for teachers and/or educational tools/supplies than Admin. salaries. But the voters voted those proposals down in the elections.........
I don't know how things are in other places, but here, both District 91 & 93 traditionally have high turnouts for bond elections and school board elections. Here in 91, I remember at least 2 Supervisors who lost their jobs because their performance didn't match patron's expectations.
One present high school has students from both county and Idaho Falls attending due to a quirk in the district boundaries. Idaho Falls high was always the high school the kids from the remote areas of Bonneville County attended- the kids who lived in Bone, Conant Valley, Swan Valley, Irwin, and all the isolated farmsteads around all of them.
And the few who lived in Weyenne, which is only less than a mile away from the Wyoming border and Freedom, WY., but is about 60 miles from Idaho Falls.
Even though the districts are close together, their patrons are traditionally a lot different. Those in 91 are usually more likely to pass a bond than 93, but that isn't always true; a lot depends on the particular school needs of the moment.
Passing one central high school for a large consolidated was a big and difficult deal in 93, back in the late 50s, when there were small high schools in Iona, Ammon, Ucon, and Osgood. Building Bonneville High took almost 7 years to accomplish, as each little village wanted the school. (It's now Bonneville Jr. High) The location was about as in the middle as it could get, and even that was hard fought.
The town of Ririe lies half in Jefferson county, half in Bonneville. Its high school is still independent, but gets county funding from both counties.
And the announcement for the new bids is out. They gave themselves a bit more wiggle room advertising for a CM/GC or possibly a CM. Can't say I understand.
The Bids have to be returned by 1/15/2016 by 4:00 p.m.
Good luck School Board. Please get this one right!
Even if they get it right there will still be lots of very unhappy people. That's life in District #93.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
