Project achitect no show to board meeting
By Phyllis Moore
Published in News on September 18, 2015 1:46 PM
When the Wayne County Board of Education reconvened Thursday morning, the intent was to address the architectural firm handling the commons area project at Goldsboro High School regarding concerns about a surprise bill of $223,471 for "professional services" and other items.
But Moseley Architects sent no representation to the meeting, forcing the newly hired superintendent, Dr. Mike Dunsmore, and Finance Officer Beverly Boltinhouse to field questions.
The board covered a lot of ground in the 22-minute session, ultimately voting 6-1 to ask the county commission for sales tax money to cover the tab. But the bulk of the discussion centered around miscommunication, the "lesson learned" and how the board will handle such situations in the future.
Dunsmore, superintendent since July 1, said he had had several conversations with Jim Copeland, vice president, and Ashley Dennis, senior associate with Moseley, who told him no "additional fees" had been added.
"Mrs. Boltinhouse went back through all the contracts, Mr. (Jack) Edwards, the schools counsel, also reviewed it, as did I," he said. "That was the original fee when the projects were bid for Spring Creek Elementary, Aycock and Goldsboro High School. That amount was specific to the GHS project.
"When it was re-bid, it appears we have been paying on these bills all along as per the fee structure and it appears the confusion was when the project was re-bid, it wasn't re-presented to the board."
Dunsmore said the problem might have stemmed from the fact that the contracts were signed so long ago, in March 2014.
"They haven't changed. There weren't any additional fees added other than the change in the re-bid," the superintendent said. "I think the issue at hand was, as I look at this, that I should have had Moseley come in and re-present it at the time of the re-bid so everybody was understanding what the fee structures were."
His recommendation, since speaking with Mrs. Boltinhouse and Edwards, was to approve the budget amendment.
Board Chairman Chris West said in the future, when a bid is presented, regardless of what might have been done a year earlier, the board needs to receive all related information.
"If this had been presented to us, if Moseley had've been here, or whoever, I'm not picking on Moseley; they do a fine job," he said. "It's just the fact that when we awarded a contract to Primus Construction Co. and they came in and gave us a bid of $1.5 million, in my honest opinion I think that we should have been informed at that point in time, 'Board members, there is an additional cost that's going to be in the project.'
"Because when I look at a total project, from a construction standpoint, architectural fees, whatever, are part of the project."
The board was not given that information, West said.
"Nobody was here to inform us of that," he said. "But when I go back and look, I see that in March of 2014 we had, according to the documents, a special called meeting. At that point in time they presented their architectural admission fees for three projects."
He said it would have also been helpful to have known that when the budget amendment was presented Monday night.
"I'll just say this, as long as I'm the chairman, as long as I'm on the board, I would like and prefer if anybody else bids for anything from Wayne County Public Schools, that it's all up front and there's no surprises," he said.
Hindsight is 20/20, Dunsmore said, expressing hope that in the future communication would be clearer.
"They (Moseley) should have been in front of this board probably once, twice, if not more, throughout all these projects, providing updates and what's going on," he said.
Board member Jennifer Strickland, elected in November, said she felt like Moseley should have been mindful of the changed dynamics and the district's concerns about costs.
"That was very apparent in the discussion that we had up here, that we needed to pare down the cost and I am very disappointed that they did not, as a professional courtesy, say, 'Don't forget, we still have these services,' especially because Ms. (Pat) Burden and I just joined the board," she said. "I would never have voted to approve the contract with this extra fee, not knowing all the extra things that GHS actually needed at this time."
West said, "I think it's been a lesson learned for the board and hopefully anybody else that wants to bid on any projects for WCPS that we need and every situation is not like this, but in the event that we have a situation where we have voted on administrative fees a year prior to a project being awarded, we certainly need to be refreshed when it's presented to us, in my opinion."
There have certainly been a lot of changes since the original contract was entered into, Dunsmore said -- including himself, the two new board members and business manager.
"In my speaking with the representatives with Moseley, and part of that is my responsibility to do due diligence with what's going on in the school system," he said. "As Mrs. Boltinhouse and I went through the contracts (Wednesday) and got up to speed with everything, it is imperative that everybody understand that over the last year and a half there's been a lot of construction going on at WCPS. I think those folks have done a wonderful job. We've seen the results of what's completed to date.
"Most projects aren't without bumps in the road, but I think there was a miscommunication here."