Council Poised To Change School Project Bid Process

By John Voket

When the Newtown Legislative Council met September 1 at 7:30, members discussed and tweaked the language in a memo of understanding that will likely be dispatched to the state’s Bureau of School Facilities. And if all parties eventually agree on its content, it will change the way Newtown and virtually all other communities in Connecticut have handled bonding and bidding processes primarily for school projects that can qualify for partial state reimbursement.

During discussion on the issue at this week’s council gathering, First Selectman Pat Llodra said she spoke to Dave Wedge about the proposed memo in June. Mr Wedge, who was the bureau’s representative at the time, was scheduled to retire by the end of August.

Mrs Llodra told The Bee ahead of the September 1 council meeting, that Mr Wedge had agreed “that we may use the process, which is similar to what we did for the high school addition,”.

The process by which Newtown — and in accordance with the memo any other Connecticut town or school district — may handle the bonding and bidding for school projects would be to:

1. Develop all plans including architectural, ed specs, etc;

2. Submit to the bureau for the assignment of a temporary project number;

3. The bureau reviews, Newtown responds to those recommendations;

4. Send the project out to bid;

5. Get town authorization to bond the bid number;

6. Submit to bureau for permanent project number and for reimbursement.

The first selectman said during her conversation with Mr Wedge, she made it clear that Newtown understands such a modified process may delay any reimbursement awarded to the town, and that the town would bear the risk of having to fully fund architects and others for projects that may not succeed in the local bonding effort.

Mrs Llodra said during the administration of Herb Rosenthal, he determined that such a process, however unique in Connecticut, was a viable way to move forward with the high school addition, which is scheduled to be completed in the next few weeks.

“At the time, Herb was adamant that we not go out to bond before the bids were in,” Mrs Llodra said. “Bonding on the estimated cost creates an environment where bidders can pitch to that number versus bidding at their most competitive prices.”

Both council Chairman Jeff Capeci and the first selectman said they see potential taxpayer benefits far outweighing any financial risks by adopting the process.

During the council meeting, it was made clear that by following the temporary project number system, the town might be in a position where it has to carry up to one year’s added debt service exclusively on the portion of the project reimbursement — if that future project is approved locally but the permanent project is not bonded at the state level until the following fiscal cycle.

“Most of these are large ticket projects,” Mrs Llodra said. “So should we develop one, and then taxpayers reject the bonding, we would lose any costs up to that point. But the likelihood of that happening is pretty rare.”

She said because the council is Newtown’s fiscal authority, she wanted the memo to be created and issued by that body, thereby creating a historical record that validates the town has choices in the way it handles the bidding and bonding process.

Mr Capeci said he believes most of the council members understand the benefits of having those options. And he said in speaking with John Goldrick at the school facilities unit this week, that after Newtown successfully negotiated the new process with its high school project, now other towns are considering those options as well.

“[The bureau] understands why we want to have the option to do it this way, and [the office] was open to reviewing the memo and either signing off on it, or keeping on file for historical reference if needed,” Mr Capeci said.

During the meeting Councilman Benjamin Spragg, who served for decades as Newtown’s finance director, said the council used to require that capital projects be handled in the bid before bond order.

“Then at one point, we were advised — maybe ill-advised — that we had to go to bond first,” Mr Spragg recalled.

Mr Capeci said that if the council approves sending the memo after it is reviewed by the town attorney, the education committee of the council may be the body that determines how the bid/bond process applies to specific projects.

Mrs Llodra also requested the council share the plan to dispatch the memo with the school board at some point in the near future. Pending its return from legal review, Mr Capeci said the authorization to send the memo could come as early as the council’s next meeting.