Capital improvements totaling more than $17 million are proceeding as planned, despite uncertainty over whether Guilderland school district will continue using all its buildings. The Guilderland Board of Education on Wednesday, Nov. 5, unanimously approved going to bid on its building project, which includes $14 million of building renovations, safety and securing improvements totaling $1.5 million, and infrastructure upgrades totaling $1.8 million. District voters approved spending up to $17.32 million on the bulk upgrades proposal last November, which district officials described as needed facilities improvements. What loomed a year ago were results from the then-uncompleted building capacity study. District leaders had said some improvements might not be completed following results from the study. School board members could have stalled bidding out some of the project, but decided adhere to the recommendation from district administrators to bid out the entire project. “Trying to hold off and take a substantial portion of the work that is going to be done and pushing it to the second summer creates a lot of issues that make it difficult to go forward with this project,” said Assistant Superintendent for Business Neil Sanders. The alternative would have been to withhold certain portions of the work pending building capacity determinations, with the remainder of the project going out to bid in January 2016. School board member Gloria Towle-Hilt said the Business Practices Committee, which she is a member of, spent “a long time” determining the best approach. Towle-Hilt said the committee ultimately agreed with district administrators’ recommendation to bid the entire project, and was urging the school board to follow suit. Sanders said he would have urged board members to delay the project if a decision on the future use of school facilities would be realized in a year; otherwise, the delay would have little value. “If we were closer to a decision in this process, it would be a different conversation,” Sanders said. “But we’re having our first public engagement in a few weeks, and that’s really the start of the process.” The timeline district leaders originally envisioned would have had a clearer direction from the building capacity study at this point. Setting aside the scenarios prolonged this decision making process. “We were probably thinking back then we would be in a position now of knowing, but we’re not. We’ve pushed this out now,” said Towle-Hilt. She said committee members felt the district would not be ready in a year to decide the future of building usage. “This is going to take some time,” she said. Around $5.5 million of construction work, or 40 percent of overall costs, could be bid out in January of 2016 and completed that summer. Construction priorities to be completed during summer 2015 include safety and security improvements to buildings, along with infrastructure needs. These security improvements include modifications to lobbies and main offices to better control building access, electronic visitor sign-in systems, additional security cameras and door swipe card access points, along with new hardware allowing faculty to quickly lock doors from inside a room. Some building systems or components are nearing a “failure point,” according to Sanders, so making repairs would not make sense economically. Bidding out the entire project would lock in labor and material prices, too. Sander said if the remaining work is bid out a year later, that could result the price escalating up to 4 percent, or around $200,000 more for the same work. “Cost escalation may also lead to a situation where the project budget may be impacted,” said Sanders. “This could lead to the district’s inability to complete all of the work as intended by having to forego elements of the project.” He said the quality of firms placing bids could diminish as the scope of work decreases through a phased bidding process. Sanders said the improvements would increase the value of buildings for potential sales or rental. “The unique attributes of a school building and its grounds make it most attractive for continuing use as an educational space,” said Sanders. “Based on that reasoning, the improvements being pursued will provide additional value to perspective tenant or purchaser for which the district will reap the benefit.” Some school board members questioned Sanders’ logic on all improvements adding value if an elementary school were sold or rented. “If any of the five schools are rented or leased out, the configuration that we’re doing up front is not going to help,” said board member Colleen O’Connell. “I disagree … with your conclusion that they are necessarily going to be schools. I think many of the schools would make very attractive office parks.” District Building and Grounds Supervisor Clifford Nooney said the dull vestibule included in the security upgrades would not likely result in a “total loss.” He said some of the systems and security cameras could be removed, too, which the district could save for later usage. “I don’t think we would lose value on having a double vestibule in any building, whether it was an office building or doctor’s office,” said Nooney. “You see that configuration in many buildings … a lot has to do with heating.” Sanders also said dividing the construction would increase complexities and possibly create inefficiencies. In other news, the school board held its public input for budget development at the start of the meeting, but no resident commented. Board of Education President Barbara Fraterrigo seemed surprised at the amount, or absence of, people signed up to comment. “Zero? Oh my goodness, OK,” she said.