Talks ongoing about high school field house by BUTCH WEIR Editor, The Poplarville Democrat There are times when the Poplarville School District may think they are taking two steps backward for each step forward. The Poplarville school board learned at its August meeting that several more parts of its ten year renovation project were moving forward with one scheduled to be completed this week Superintendent Carl Merritt recently said because of the economic downturn of the last several years two or three years may have to be added to the timetable. The district had been slightly over half way through that ten year projection. Of the projects previously approved in the current renovation phase the flooring abatement at the Career Development Center is completed, said Lewis Griffin, project architect. Three other projects received good status reports Monday: The painting of the Middle school gym should be finished by the end of the week, he said, while changes to the floor plan of the Lower Elementary school and converting a breezeway at the high school into an office space will be underway soon. “Those are the immediate ones that ya’ll asked me to proceed with so I’m working diligently on those. Three projects, out soon,” Griffin said. His status report on construction of a new field house painted another picture. “Field house we need to get back in the hopper and get it back out there.” Last year the board began looking at plans and funding options for the building after it was determined the current structure at the high school had drainage issues and other problems. As discussions progressed rojected costs and the bidding process in general caused concern among the board. Griffin said the experience gained from the bid process on the development center project taught them a lot about the bid process. He presented the board with one option on how to approach the bidding process for a field house with a “carefully defined bid package.” “There are a lot of state laws that you have to follow and what we in essence did is what you would call construction management, or subbing it out, or multiple prime contracts.” In addition, the state auditor’s office, attorney general’s opinions and the architect are all sources that the board and its personnel should include in the construction planning process. Board member Samuel Gentry said the district is looking at using the same construction plans to keep within the price range the district is comfortable with and “he’s (Griffin) just going at it a different direction.” He said if he understood what had been explained, he looked for the price of the project to double. Merritt said that may be a possibility “and you as a board have the right to accept or reject.” Gentry said, “Well, you know what mine’s going to be. We started off from a $40,000 project (when the field house was first discussed). Now, we couldn’t get it done at a hundred (thousand). “Reckon the next thing we’re going to try $200 (thousand), but I’m not going no more.” At the board’s May meeting two bids of more than $200,000 each, submitted by two construction firms in Hattiesburg, were substantially higher than the approximately $90,000 the board was willing to spend and were rejected. Initial meetings with contractors prior to putting the project out for bids in April produced an estimated cost of $120,000, it was reported at the May meeting. Samantha Sandifer, board financial officer, said state bid laws say that if the project is under $50,000 bids are not required; if the project is over $50,000 but under $75,000 bids are required; and, if the cost is over $75,000 an architect or engineer is required. The board indicated it wants to explore having the work done “in-house” using local licensed and bonded contractors while avoiding the problems which developed with the current building and gave its approval to search for ways to fund the new field house construction. Merritt said he anticipated being able to come back in the fall with proposals for the project. He said this project has been in the works for a year and reiterated that “the present facility has been deemed not suitable. We can make temporary make-do for our kids but we’ve done that.”
Posted on: Wed, 21 Aug 2013 21:53:54 +0000