The New School Building Committee has issued updated site plans and budget projections for the pending elementary school project. The committee is balancing a number of cost and design issues, but the project is currently on budget and on track for its 2025 opening, according to members.

Committee Chair Graham Curtis said that while design plan costs have risen, the figure does not mean a direct increase in project costs or to taxpayers. According to Graham, budget variances in such a large project are part of what he and the committee are charged with monitoring, and increases were expected and have been reassessed.

“The Schematic Design (SD) was actually $10 million over the projected budget, and we had to come up with a solution to move forward. We did that through a combination of value engineering and reductions in scope, moving some money from the overall referendum-approved budget and also some money from the Inflation Reduction Act, and we all had some contingency funds available,” said Graham. “With that plan, we’ve decided to move into the next phase, Design Development, which we hope to have done in several weeks.”

According to Graham, significant increases in the SD phase are an anticipated variable that all large construction projects face.

“This is all part of the committee’s charge and what we do. The fact it rose, we knew this was likely. This escalation, considering all of the cost increases like supply chain problems and inflation, wasn’t a shocking thing that it was going to be high. It’s not uncommon that you would be over budget on paper with this phase, and then we react to that,” said Graham.

Graham said it is important for taxpayers to understand that the actual spending has not increased on the project. It is simply a matter of finding funding within the project and from outside grant sources, or pulling back on some design elements in order to meet budgetary projections.

“If you’re designing a house and you might say to the contractor, ‘I want this, I want that. You then get the estimate and realize that you can’t afford this or that…and you simply need to reduce the scope. So, the Board of Ed[ucation] comes up with the plan for what they want in the school, they give it to Building Committee, and sometimes when we get that estimate back, we have to recommend changes and ask if they can make those changes. And that is all part of the process,” said Graham.

Graham said that just like a private construction project, the school project has projections, wish list items, and variables that all contribute to the final construction cost. According to Graham, municipal projects are often in this fluid state, and as costs and feasibility slowly start being calculated, shifts in design and conception occur.

“Some of this is also just the nature of the process, in that the plan is not completely refined. These estimates are very conservative, and they assume that it is a little higher,” said Graham. “So, we are about halfway through that part of the process. It gives us flexibility because, at the end of the day, the price is only an estimate until you get somebody to bid on it.”

Graham said no money would be reallocated until the committee receives a clearer estimate and a more focused cost projection is developed.

“We want to wait until we get the second estimate before we have to move any money around. We could’ve moved it around first, but we want to get a tighter number and know exactly what we’re up against,” said Graham. “This is all normal in a process like this. Projects like this always come in over budget, and you simply have to react to it. We are still on schedule, and we’re going to make the hard decisions that we have to. We’ll know in May when the second estimate comes in and come up with a plan of how to deal with it.”